Kindergarten to Grade 12 (K-12) Education Standards Development Committee

Learn about the group who develop recommendations for a new accessibility education standard under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA).

On this page Skip this page navigation

Background

In 2017, the Minister Responsible for Accessibility established the Education Standards Development Committee—a group of representatives comprised of people with disabilities, disability organizations and sector experts—to develop recommendations for a proposed accessibility standard to address barriers in publicly funded K-12 education.

Recommendations

The committee put forward initial recommendations and asked for public feedback to help them draft their final recommendations to the Minister Responsible for Accessibility. Read the report that provides high-level summaries as identified by members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee.

The committee has reviewed all comments, finalized their recommendations and submitted them to the Minister for Seniors and Accessibility for consideration. Read the final recommendations.

Read a report from the accessibility K-12 Education Standards Development Committee, Planning for Emergencies and Safety Working Group about the challenges and barriers during COVID‑19 for students with disabilities.

Technical sub-committee transition recommendations

K-12 and postsecondary education committees also formed a technical sub-committee that focused on transition planning (for example, moving between levels of education or from K-12 to the workforce, the community and to postsecondary education):

List of members and representation

The following is a full list of the committee members including the organization or sector they are representing. Committee membership may be subject to change.

Voting members:

Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Learning Disabilities Association of Ontario
Stephen Andrews, Ontario Catholic School Trustees’ Association
Mike Cyr, Disability Community Representative
Donna Edwards, Ontario Public School Boards’ Association
Jon Greenaway, ErinoakKids Treatment Centre
Rita-Marie Hadley, Lansdowne Children’s Centre
Wendy Lau, LEADS Employment Services
David Lepofsky, Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act Alliance
Michelle Longlade, Ontario College of Teachers (Retired)
Sheila McWatters, Education Sector Representative
Doug Mein, Simcoe County District School Board Accessibility Advisory Committee
Ashleigh Molloy, TransEd Institute
Alison Morse, Easter Seals Ontario
Rana Nasrazadani, Student
Victoria Nolan, CNIB
Ben Smith, Student (Former Representative of the Ontario Student Trustees’ Association)
John (Jack) Stadnyk, Huron-Superior Catholic District School Board (Retired)
Jane Ste. Marie, Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation
Angelo Tocco, Education Sector Representative
Lindy Zaretsky, Reaching Education Resolutions Inc.

Non-voting members:

Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Scope and timelines

A standards development committee will develop recommendations for a proposed accessibility standard to address barriers in publicly funded K-12 education, as required by Section 9 of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act. To develop this standard, members of the committee are required to:

define the long-range objective of the proposed standard
determine the measures, policies, practices and requirements to be implemented on or before January 1, 2025, and the timeframe for their implementation
develop a proposed standard that the committee deems advisable for public comment
consider public feedback, seek additional information if needed, and make any changes that the committee deems advisable
make recommendations for a new accessibility standard to the Minister Responsible for Accessibility and to the Minister of Education

To support this work, an online survey was conducted from May through October 2017, and received roughly 3,000 responses. Respondents identified common areas where students with disabilities and their families or caregivers may face barriers to an accessible education. These include:

information and awareness, including knowledge of available accommodations and accessibility awareness training
navigating the educational system, including seeking accommodations and participating in inclusive decision-making
transition planning, including moving between school systems and into employment or community living

The minister has asked the committee to carefully consider the survey feedback received as well as committee member expertise in these areas, and work together to identify priority areas for further discussion. As a first deliverable, the committee will report back to the Minister Responsible for Accessibility and to the Minister of Education on proposed priority areas, which will be publicly posted. Following this phase of work, the committee will develop recommendations for a proposed accessibility standard to address those priority areas.

The minister has also asked that the committee consider the area of transition planning in particular as a priority. Effective transition planning – empowering students to plan their individual pathways – promotes student success in school and in life. Survey responses shared personal experiences demonstrating that barriers can occur as students transition from elementary to high school and as they then move to postsecondary education, employment, early adulthood and community living. The minister has asked the committee to consider ways to prevent and remove those barriers and to work in collaboration with the Standards Development Committee for Postsecondary Education on this issue.

In order to ensure the committee remains aligned with the work of the Standards Development Committee for Postsecondary Education, the minister has asked both Chairs to form a joint subcommittee representing members from both sectors and from the disability community. This subcommittee will be responsible for sharing information across the two committees and for considering areas of commonality.

The minister has asked that the committee work together with the Minister of Education’s Expert Panel for Capital Standards regarding barriers related to building accessibility and capital planning.

In addition to recommendations for regulated accessibility standards, the committee may choose to make recommendations on practical non-regulatory measures to remove or prevent barriers. Such measures could include recommendations related to public information and awareness or other programs that could complement updated or new regulation.

Guidelines for recommendations

The following guidelines are intended to support the work of the committee as it develops its recommendations:

respect and be complementary to the principles, purpose and requirements of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, and support the end goal of achieving accessibility for Ontarians with disabilities on or before January 1, 2025, taking into account:
- the range of disabilities that the measures, policies, practices and requirements are intended to address
- the nature of the barriers that the measures, policies, practices and requirements are intended to identify, remove and prevent
- any technical and fiscal considerations/impacts that may be associated with their implementation (for example, for obligated organizations, sectors, and the province more broadly)
focus efforts on preventing barriers both now and in the future
consider existing Ontario legislative and regulatory frameworks, as well as measures and supports that already exist in the sector
consider inter-jurisdictional best practices and innovative solutions, keeping in mind the context of Ontario’s current regulatory framework specific to the education sector
consider fiscal implications and feasibility for the sector to comply
consider the ‘enforceability’ of the requirements to support compliance and enforcement of the proposed standard
where appropriate, reflect international standards, legislation, regulation, codes, and best practices in Ontario, other provinces, and internationally, in the area of education and accessibility

Throughout the process, the members of the Accessibility Standards Advisory Council sitting on the Committee are encouraged to keep council members informed of its progress.

Key Deliverables and Timelines

The standards development committee will complete the following key deliverables within the specified timelines.

Meetings: The committee will meet for one- or two-day sessions, approximately every eight weeks as needed.
Standards development committee work plan: The committee will prepare and provide the minister with a draft work plan early in the development of a proposed K-12 education standard. The work plan will outline key milestones, activities, and timelines to achieve the mandate described here.
Proposed priority areas: Within six months or sooner of the committee’s first meeting, the committee will report to the Minister on the proposed priority areas for the development of recommended accessibility standards. Proposed priority areas must be based on evidence including survey feedback, and must reflect the guidelines set out above. The report will be posted publicly.
Recommendations for proposed Accessibility Standard for Education: Within eighteen months or sooner of confirmation of the committee’s proposed priority areas, the committee will deliver to the minister proposed recommendations to be posted for public review.
Finalizing recommendations for revisions to the standard: As required by the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act. A report on comments received during the public review will be prepared by the Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility and the comments will be given to the Committee for its consideration. The committee will consider public comments, seek additional information if needed, and make changes based on public comments as the committee deems advisable. The committee will submit the final recommendations to the minister, along with a report on its consideration of public comments, no later than 14 weeks after receiving the report and public comments.
Meeting minutes and progress reports: No later than four weeks following each of its meetings, the committee will approve and provide the minister with a copy of its meeting minutes.

Meeting minutes

Meeting 20: Tuesday January 5, 2022
Meeting 19: Tuesday November 23, 2021
Meeting 18: Tuesday November 9, 2021
Meeting 17: Tuesday October 26, 2021
Meeting 16: Thursday October 21, 2021
Meeting 15: Tuesday January 19, 2021
Meeting 14: Thursday December 10, 2020
Meeting 13: Friday November 27, 2020
Meeting 12: Thursday November 12, 2020
Meeting 11: Thursday October 29, 2020
Meeting 10: Tuesday October 6, 2020
Meeting 9: September 3, 2020
Meeting 8: August 11, 2020
Meeting 7: July 14, 2020
Meeting 6: June 16, 2020
Meeting 5: May 5-6, 2020
Meeting 4: February 12, 2020
Meeting 3: January 8, 2020
Meeting 2: November 12, 2019
Meeting 1: April 17-18, 2018
Orientation meeting: February 5, 2018

K-12 education meeting 20: Tuesday January 5, 2022

Letter from chair to the minister

February 11, 2022

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility
5th Floor, 777 Bay Street,

Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister Cho,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Meeting Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the final virtual meeting held on January 5, 2022 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

The Committee heard opening remarks from Assistant Deputy Minister Alison Drummond for the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Division acknowledging the committee’s dedication and the progress that has been made on finalizing their recommendations report. The committee proceeded with votes on the following sections of the report: preamble, attitudes, behaviours, perceptions and assumptions, awareness and training, organizational barriers, physical and architectural barriers, emergency planning and safety framework, glossary of terms and additional recommendation areas. The amendments for the other sections of the report were passed by electronic voting. The meeting concluded with closing remarks from Deputy Minister Carlene Alexander for the Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility praising the committee’s hard work towards the development of their final recommendations report.

Looking ahead, the Committee will vote on the final recommendations report once the amendments are made and then submitted to you for your consideration.

I want to take the opportunity to thank you and your ministry staff for supporting the Committee and advancing accessibility and inclusion in Ontario.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting information

Date: January 5, 2022 from 9:30am-10:30am

Location: Virtual

Format of Committee minutes and references: For the purposes of referencing Committee documents and items in the minutes: ‘M’ (Meeting) represents the meeting number/minute items/sections/action items and ‘Partial’ represents limited attendance. Motion represents a vote that has occurred.

All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Final Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk, Jane Ste. Marie, Angelo Tocco, and Lindy Zaretsky

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Alison Drummond (Partial), Mary Bartolomucci, Paul Challen, Sonya Del Monte, Jason Schroter, and Jenna Strathearn

Ministry of Education staff: Charmaine Perera, David Moore and Athena Oppedisano

Non-Voting Member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Captionist: Gemme Humenny

ASL Interpreters: Nick Markin and Kate Lewis

Regrets: Wendy Lau (voted “yes” on all amendments through electronic voting)

Meeting minutes

M 20.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks to the Committee and provided an outline of the key deliverables for finalizing the Final Recommendations Report. The Chair congratulated the Committee on the progress that has been made and concluded with the goal of the meeting to vote on all of the proposed amendments for finalizing the recommendations report to be submitted to the Minister.

M 20.2 Housekeeping and logistical information

Ministry staff reminded committee members of the voting process, and highlighted that the Committee would have an opportunity to hold online votes for items if there was no time to hold all votes by the end of the meeting.

M 20.3 Remarks from the Assistant Deputy Minister Alison Drummond for the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Division

Assistant Deputy Minister Alison Drummond provided introductory remarks to the Committee. Assistant Deputy Minister Drummond expressed her support for the Committee’s work and acknowledged the dedication of the members in their review of the public feedback and work towards finalizing their recommendations at today’s meeting. Assistant Deputy Minister Drummond stated she looks forward to reviewing the final recommendations and the Ministry is here to support them in their final steps toward completion.

M 20.4 Opportunity for committee to vote on final recommendations

The Chair opened the floor for voting on amendments to the initial recommendations based on the public feedback received. The Committee voted on amendments to the following sections of the report:

Motion 20.4.1 Vote on preamble section

All amendments to the preamble based on public feedback passed unanimously.

Motion 20.4.2 Vote on amended recommendations for attitudes, behaviours, perceptions and assumptions section

All amendments to the recommendations based on public feedback passed unanimously.

Motion 20.4.3 Vote on amended recommendations for awareness and training section

All amendments to the recommendations based on public feedback passed successfully with one Committee member who voted “no” for the following recommendation:

Barrier: Vision loss is a “low incidence” disability among school-age children. When students with vision loss (students who are blind, low vision, deafblind, or have vision loss and another disability) reach school, the indispensable school board employee who is vital to their acquiring literacy and other key learning skills is the expert teacher of the visually impaired (TVI). At school boards, they are itinerant teachers. They go from school to school, providing the direct training to individual students with vision loss, one at a time, in specialized areas like braille reading and writing. They also teach students with vision loss how to use rapidly evolving adaptive technology, such as screen-reading and print-enlarging programs. These apps enable students with vision loss to use a computer, tablet or smart phone.

The itinerant teacher of the visually impaired is also the indispensable expert who educates and supports a student's classroom teacher, educational assistant, and other teaching staff on how to effectively teach that student with vision loss. Most of the time that students with vision loss spend in school is with general education or special education teaching staff who have no training in how to teach students with vision loss.

Ontario’s training requirements to qualify as a teacher of the visually impaired are inadequate. They are unjustifiably much lower than in many other jurisdictions, including in much if not most of the rest of Canada. This is substantially lower than Ontario requirements to qualify as a teacher of the deaf.

To qualify as a teacher of the visually impaired in Ontario, the Ontario College of Teachers and Ministry of Education regulations require a qualified teacher to merely undertake three 125 hour additional qualification courses in the blind/low vision field. In practice, a teacher only needs to take the first of these additional qualification courses. They can then get a job as a teacher of the visually impaired at an Ontario school boards and work directly teaching students with vision loss.

The Ministry of Education and the Ontario College of Teachers do not monitor or enforce the requirement for a teacher to take the second and third of those additional qualification courses, once they start to work as a teacher of the visually impaired. The existing “requirement” of three teacher of the visually impaired additional qualification courses is only a requirement on paper, not in practice.

Even if a teacher takes all three basic teacher of the visually impaired additional qualification courses, the courses are far too short and their content insufficient to cover all the content that a teacher of the visually impaired needs to learn. In those courses, a teacher need never work with a student with vision loss, or observe a properly trained teacher of the visually impaired effectively working with a student with vision loss, or meet a student with vision loss.

No Ontario university offers a proper post-graduate degree training program to train to work as teachers of the visually impaired, unlike British Columbia and Nova Scotia. In contrast, Ontario commendably provides a post-graduate one year program at a Faculty of Education to qualify as a teacher of the deaf. Ontario fully funds that program.

In contrast, to become a teacher of the visually impaired in at least five other Canadian provinces, in much of the United States as well as in the United Kingdom and New Zealand a teacher must complete a more extensive one year (at least) university-taught graduate degree on teaching students with vision loss that includes a properly-supervised practicum.

It is therefore recommended that:

The mandatory Ontario requirements to qualify as a teacher of the visually impaired should be substantially increased. A qualified teacher should be required to successfully complete a one-year graduate masters program delivered by a university's Faculty of Education, dedicated to training teachers of the visually impaired and that includes a substantial practicum requirement.
A graduate-level university program should be established in Ontario, and fully provincially funded.
To address a serious shortage, the Ontario Government should incentivize teachers to train as teachers of the visually impaired , and should finance the training of a surge of teachers to undertake this new teacher of the visually impaired training, in order to substantially increase the pool of available teachers of the visually impaired in Ontario. After that, a regular flow of new teachers of the visually impaired should be funded through this training to ensure a long-term sufficient supply of qualified teachers of the visually impaired in Ontario.
A provincially-funded program should be established to “retrofit” or upgrade the skills and training of those who are already working as teachers of the visually impaired in Ontario and who did not undertake a graduate-level program in teaching students with vision loss. This should include, for example, effective training in the new adaptive technology that students with vision loss can use as part of their education and activities of daily living.
The Ministry of Education and the Ontario College of Teachers should review and where needed, strengthen the training requirements for teachers with other disability-related specializations. The implementation of the recommendations above regarding training for teachers of the visually impaired should not be delayed pending this review.

Motion 20.4.4 Vote on recommendations for curriculum assessment and instruction section

All amendments to the recommendations based on public feedback passed unanimously.

Motion 20.4.5 Vote on recommendations for organizational barriers section

All amendments to the recommendations based on public feedback passed unanimously.

Motion 20.4.6 Vote on recommendations for physical and architectural barriers section

All amendments to the recommendations based on public feedback passed unanimously.

Motion 20.4.7 Vote on recommendations for planning for emergencies and safety framework section

All amendments to the recommendations based on public feedback passed unanimously.

Motion 20.4.8 Vote on additional recommendation areas: suggestions from committee member David Lepofsky

All amendments to these recommendations as supplied by member passed unanimously.

Motion 20.4.9 Vote on glossary of terms section

All amendments to the glossary based on public feedback passed unanimously.

M 20.5 Remarks from Deputy Minister Carlene Alexander of the Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility

Deputy Minister Carlene Alexander provided closing remarks to the Committee. The Deputy Minister acknowledged how the Committee has continued to do important analysis and discussions despite the many challenges posed from the COVID-19 pandemic. The Deputy Minister expressed congratulatory remarks regarding the final work of the Committee in being one step closer to submitting their Final Recommendations Report. The Deputy Minister looks forward to reviewing the Final Recommendations Report and thanked the members for all their hard work.

M 20.6 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the members for their participation and hard work through this journey of reviewing and finalizing their recommendations. The Chair also thanked the Ministry staff, Captioner and ASL Interpreters for their support during the meeting. The Chair noted that the amended recommendations will be combined by the Ministry into the Final Recommendations Report, which will be sent out to members for final review and electronic vote.

K-12 education meeting 19: Tuesday November 23, 2021

Letter from chair to the minister

December 7, 2021

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
777 Bay Street, 5^th Floor
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister Cho,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Meeting Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the virtual meetings held on November 23, 2021 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

In this meeting, the Committee continued our section-by-section review of the feedback that has been received from the public on our Initial Recommendations Report. Our focus was again considering how we could incorporate this feedback as revisions to the recommendations we had made in the initial report.

We are looking forward to moving making final edits to this initial report, and voting to approve it as a Committee, in preparation for submitting our Final Recommendations Report to you as soon as possible.

At the same time, we are looking forward to receiving the report of the Technical Sub-Committee on transitions, and to voting on that report prior to the Technical Sub-Committee submitting it to you.

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting 1 information

Date: Thursday, November 23, 2021 from 10:00am-11:30am

Location: virtual

All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Meeting 1 present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Jane Ste. Marie, Victoria Nolan, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco, and Lindy Zaretsky.

Non-Voting Member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Regrets: Ben Smith

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Sonya Del Monte, Paul Challen, Alex Ibrahim, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu, and Ann Louise Fitzpatrick.

Captionist: Michelle (Canadian Hearing Society)

ASL Interpreters: Kate Lewis, Nick Markin

Meeting 1 minutes

M 19.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo, provided remarks welcoming the Committee and commending them on their work so far in reviewing public feedback on the Initial Recommendations Report. Chair noted the high level of positive public support for the Initial Recommendations Report via the many survey responses and written submissions received. She also noted her goal of finalizing the Committee’s report for submission to the Minister by December.

M 19.2 Review of public feedback

Chair explained that the Committee would follow a section-by-section review of the public feedback on the Initial Recommendations Report (initial report), with each small group providing an explanation of all edits being considered. Chair noted all edits will be consolidated into a version of the Final Recommendations Report for review, and then voted on as a whole.

The Attitudes, Behaviours, Perceptions and Assumptions group noted some minor changes based on public feedback. These are reflected in the group’s edits to the initial report and are related mostly to feedback on the recommendations on the Office of the Ontario Child Advocate.

The Curriculum Assessment and Instruction group noted some changes based on public feedback that are reflected in the group’s edits to the initial report. These centered on the use of terminology such as “alternative” curriculum and “streaming” of students. Ministry of Education was asked to provide ministry standards on how curriculum is reviewed with respect to credits being earned for alternative curriculum.

The Digital Learning and Technology group noted that their edits to their section in the initial report would be forthcoming.

The Social Realms group noted some amendments that are reflected in their edits to the initial report, related to some wording changes on transportation services, board placement opportunities, and other areas.

The Physical and Architectural Barriers group noted that their edits to their section in the initial report would be forthcoming.

The Planning for Emergencies and Safety Framework group noted that their changes, as reflected in their edits to the initial report, center mainly on the role of a proposed Accessibility Secretariat. Other members noted that they would be submitting suggestions for changes to this section.

The Timelines and Accountability group noted that they did not have any proposed changes at this time.

General Discussion: Following this group-by-group summary, the Chair offered time for a general discussion of the ongoing proposed edits to the initial report.

Members raised the following points of discussion and requested information from the Ministry of Education:

a formal definition of “alternative program” and “alternative curriculum”?
Definition of “low-incidence” disability?

Ministry of Education staff committed to providing a response to both requests.

Members raised a general concern re: public feedback on the terms “family”, “guardians” etc. Chair suggested a global change to include “parent and/or caregiver” and requested that Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff make that change in the report, if the Committee agrees to the change.

One member noted that the Committee could consider some general modification in the report that may be outside the Committee’s initial scope but still worth inclusion. These include considering that the government’s mandate for an Education Standard extend to private schools, and to pre-schools, especially in the area of barriers that currently exist in early literacy/reading programs.

M 19.3 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks for this portion of the meeting and requested that Committee members send her and Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff any key messages they felt had emerged from the meeting. The Chair thanked the Committee for the morning’s discussion and noted that the afternoon session would re-convene at 2:30 pm.

As part of her closing marks the Chair also thanked the Committee members who reviewed the French-language public feedback and noted the Minutes for previous meetings are in Ministry approvals and that members would be receiving these soon. The Chair noted that the afternoon session would focus on a review of the glossary of terms in the initial report.

As well, the Chair outlined next steps for the Committee, including: submission of proposed changes by groups who did not present them in this meeting; an electronic vote on amendments to each section of the report; final revisions to the report as indicated; a final vote on the report; and submission to Minister along the Chair’s intended timeline range of December 12-15, 2021.

The Chair also noted that the Committee can expect a version of the Technical Sub-Committee report for voting in the near future, and also indicated that the Technical Sub-Committee had been making excellent progress on its report.

The Chair adjourned the morning session.

Meeting 2 information

Date: Thursday, November 23, 2021 from 2:30pm-3:30pm

Location: virtual

Meeting 2 present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Ben Smith, Jane Ste. Marie, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco, Victoria Nolan and Lindy Zaretsky.

Non-Voting Member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Regrets: Steven Andrews, Rita-Marie Hadley

Captionist: Michelle (Canadian Hearing Society)

ASL Interpreters: Kate Lewis, Nick Markin

Meeting 1 minutes

M 19.4 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair provided welcome remarks and thanked all members for their participation in the morning session, and for their return for the afternoon meeting.

The Chair noted that this session would be devoted to a discussion of the Initial Recommendations Report’s (initial report) glossary, and to a discussion of the proposed preamble to the initial report. As well, the Chair noted that there would be further discussion of the steps the Committee will be taking to finalize the report for submission to the Minister.

M 19.5 Review of Glossary of terms

Some members noted that they had provided clarifications, revisions and new terms to be added to the current glossary. Members reviewed a one-page document on revisions to the glossary and the Chair encouraged members to send in comments on this document.

Members discussed some of the key terms in the glossary that emerged as contentious or needing clarification via the public feedback. Members discussed the need to clarify terms vs the “real requirement: of terminology such as “alternative curriculum” – which is to help some students learn the core curriculum. Members noted that a perceived reduction in curriculum expectations can lead to a “backdoor streaming” effect which should be avoided.

M 19.6 Committee discussion: Review of proposed preamble to Final Recommendations Report

Chair noted that a draft preamble document has been submitted for Committee consideration. The aim of this document is to summarize at a high level theme of “what we heard” – that is, some of the major themes coming out of the public feedback – as well as to acknowledge to the public that the feedback they provided was very welcome and much appreciated.

Some members noted possible amendments based on their preliminary review of the preamble. Chair noted that all members should review the preamble in its entirety, as well as with specific references in it to the barrier areas they have worked on in small groups.

The Chair also noted that there could be two approaches to the “preamble” function – to provide a full preamble at the start of the final report; or, to do section-by-section of shorter “what we heard” texts. Members noted benefits of both -- reminding all that one of the key intents was to show the public that their feedback was heard and summarizing at a high level some key themes.

The Chair requested members to provide their preferred approach as soon as possible for staff follow up.

M 19.7 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and noted that the subsequent Committee meetings were likely to be “virtual” sessions to vote of the finalization of the Final Recommendations Report – making this meeting potentially the final synchronous group session.

The Chair thanked the Committee for all the Members’ significant efforts in developing the initial report and considering feedback from the public towards producing a final report for the Minister, especially in light of the meetings going online. The Chair also thanked Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff for their support in meetings; Ministry of Education staff for partner ministry support; and the interpreters and captionists.

The Chair noted that Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff would be in touch with members to formalize next steps and adjourned the meeting.

K-12 education meeting 18: Tuesday November 9, 2021

Letter from chair to the minister

December 7, 2021

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
777 Bay Street, 5^th Floor
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister Cho,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Meeting Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the virtual meeting held on November 9, 2021 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

The Committee small groups presented their proposed changes and/ or additions to their recommendations for member review and discussion. The new Assistant Deputy Minister Clayton LaTouche for the Student Support and Field Services Division within the Ministry of Education provided introductory remarks to the Committee. The Committee will continue to review the significant amount of public feedback received from the survey and written submissions on the Initial Recommendations Report and present their proposed changes to the Committee.

Looking ahead to the Committee’s next virtual meeting on November 23, the Committee will continue to review and discuss proposed changes and/or additions to their recommendations based on the public feedback received (if applicable).

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s ongoing progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting 1 information

Date: November 9, 2021 from 10:30am-11:00am

Location: virtual

All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Meeting 1 present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Victoria Nolan, Jane Ste. Marie, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky.

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Paul Challen, Jenna Strathearn.

Non-Voting Member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Captionist: Gemme Hummeny

ASL Interpreters: Kate Lewis, Gloria Brifoglio

Regrets: Rana Nasrazadani, Ben Smith

Meeting 1 minutes

M 18.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks to the Committee and provided an outline of the key outcomes for the meeting. The Chair thanked the members again for all their hard work within the small groups to review proposed changes to the recommendations.

M 18.2 Opportunity for all small groups to provide overview of their discussion on public feedback

The Committee small groups had an opportunity to provide an overview of their discussions within their small group meetings. Members were able to provide feedback on the proposed changes and additions the small groups presented.

M 18.3 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and reminded members to return for the afternoon meeting. The Chair was very pleased and impressed with the work from the members thus far and looks forward to the afternoon meeting for more small group presentations.

Meeting 2 information

Date: November 9, 2021 from 1:00pm-2:30pm

Location: virtual

All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Meeting 2 present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Jane Ste. Marie, Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco.

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Alison Drummond (partial attendance), Mary Bartolomucci, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Paul Challen, Jenna Strathearn.

Ministry for Education staff: Clayton LaTouche (partial attendance), Silva Boghossian (partial attendance), Charmaine Perera, David Moore, Athena Oppedisano.

Non-Voting Member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Captionist: Gemme Hummeny

Regrets: Mike Cyr, Victoria Nolan, Lindy Zaretsky

Meeting 2 minutes

M 18.4 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided opening remarks to the Committee for the afternoon meeting and thanked them for their participation. The Chair provided welcoming introductions to the new Assistant Deputy Minister Clayton La Touche for the Student Support and Field Services Division within the Ministry of Education.

M 18.5 Introductory Remarks from Assistant Deputy Minister Clayton LaTouche -- Assistant Deputy Minister of Student Support and Field Services – Ministry of Education

Assistant Deputy Minister Clayton LaTouche provided introductory remarks to the Committee and thanked them for having him at their meeting. The Assistant Deputy Minister gave an overview of his background and his current work within the Ministry of Education. The Assistant Deputy Minister provided well wishes to the members and looks forward to seeing their Final Recommendations Report when finalized.

M 18.6 Opportunity for all small groups to provide overview of their discussion on public feedback

The Committee small groups presentations continued from where they left in the morning meeting. Once again, all of the members had the opportunity to provide feedback and comments on the proposed changes and/or additions from the small groups. The small groups will continue to review the next section of feedback and provide their proposed changes where applicable.

M 18.7 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided concluding remarks and thanked the Committee for all their collaborative and efficient work. The Chair reminded members to provide key messages, and the next meeting will take place on November 23, 2021.

K-12 education meeting 17: Tuesday October 26, 2021

Letter from chair to the minister

December 7, 2021

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
777 Bay Street, 5^th Floor
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister Cho,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Meeting Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the virtual meeting held on October 26, 2021 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

The Committee reviewed and discussed the public feedback received on the long-term objective and guiding principles. Each of the Committee’s small groups had an opportunity provide an overview of the work completed in their small groups in reviewing the public feedback received on their recommendations. The Committee’s next steps include the review of the next section of public feedback received through the survey and written submissions on the Initial Recommendations Report.

Looking ahead to the Committee’s next virtual meeting on November 9, the Committee small groups will continue to present and discuss proposed changes and/or additions to their recommendations based on the public feedback received (if applicable).

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s ongoing progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting information

Date: Thursday, October 26, 2021 from 1:00pm-2:30pm

Location: virtual

All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Present

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Paul Challen, Jenna Strathearn.

Non-Voting Member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Captionist: Gemme Hummeny

ASL Interpreters: Kate Lewis, Nick Markin

Regrets: Ben Smith and Victoria Nolan

Meeting minutes

M 17.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks to the Committee and provided an outline of the key deliverables for the meeting. The Chair thanked the members for all their quick work within their small groups to review the public feedback.

M 17.2 Overview of long-term objective and guiding principles feedback

The Chair led a discussion regarding the public feedback received on the long-term objective and guiding principles. The members discussed how there was not a substantial amount of feedback on the long-term objective and guiding principles. The only potential amendment is to ensure the guiding principles are in plain and clear language.

M 17.3 Opportunity for all small groups to provide overview of their discussion on public feedback

The Committee small groups had an opportunity to provide an overview of the feedback they heard on their recommendations, the proposed changes, and the discussions they had. The Chair allowed for all members to provide feedback and comments on the proposed changes and/or additions. The small groups will continue to review the next section of feedback and provide their proposed changes.

M 17.4 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the Committee for all their collaborative and dedicated work. The Chair reminded members to provide key messages, review the new small group feedback that will be distributed in the coming weeks and the next meeting will take place on November 9, 2021.

K-12 education meeting 16: Thursday October 21, 2021

Letter from chair to the minister

December 7, 2021

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
777 Bay Street, 5^th Floor
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister Cho,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Meeting Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the virtual meetings held on October 21, 2021 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

This meeting was the first we have held since January 2021. In it, the Committee began our review of the feedback that has been received from the public on our Initial Recommendations Report, starting our discussions by reviewing the feedback received on our recommendations for each of the barrier areas contained in the report.

We are looking forward to moving ahead on this discussion in our subsequent meetings, and then to making final edits to this initial report, in preparation for submitting our Final Recommendations Report to you as soon as possible.

At the same time, we are looking forward to receiving the report of the Technical Sub-Committee (TSC) on transitions, and to voting on that report prior to that report being submitted to you as well.

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting 1 information

Date: Thursday, October 21, 2021 from 10:00am-11:30am

Location: virtual

All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Meeting 1 present

Non-Voting Member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Regrets: None

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Sonya Del Monte, Paul Challen, Alex Ibrahim, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu, and Ann Louise Fitzpatrick.

Captionist: Gemme Hummeny

ASL Interpreters: Kate Lewis, Gloria Brifoglio

Meeting 1 minutes

M 16.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo, provided remarks welcoming the Committee back, as well as an outline of the key deliverables for the meeting. She noted the high level of public support for the Initial Recommendations Report via the many survey responses and written submissions received. She also noted her goal of finalizing the Committee’s report for submission to the Minister by December 2021.

M 16.2 Overview of committee objectives and review of public feedback

Ministry staff reminded the Committee that the objective of their next series of meetings is to review the public feedback received on the Initial Recommendations Report, and consider how this feedback can be incorporated as edits into a Final Recommendations Report for submission to the Minister. To that end staff provided a brief overview of the public feedback received, focusing on specific feedback on each barrier area.

Several members requested that Ministry staff assist the Committee by grouping the public feedback that was provided to them as a comprehensive summary, into barrier areas for easier analysis which staff agreed. Members also noted the need to press ahead with this analysis of public feedback, subsequent edits based on the feedback, and submission of the Final Recommendations Report to the Minister by December 2021.

M 16.3 Committee discussion: Review of Public Feedback for Small Group Three: Assessment, Curriculum, and Instruction

Committee members noted that there is a challenge at looking at the feedback on each barrier area in isolation, noting that there is a lot of interconnection between barrier areas. Members also noted that an implementation strategy will be required for all recommendations, and the need to consider working with Indigenous communities in developing recommendations for proposed standards.

Chair and Committee members noted the need for preamble in the Final Recommendations Report, regarding about the interdependence -- if we one section reflects a change, other areas will need to be changed also.

Chair and Committee members also noted that further review of the public feedback on this barrier area will be brought forward in subsequent meetings.

M 16.4 Introductory remarks from Assistant Deputy Minister Alison Drummond

Assistant Deputy Minister Drummond introduced herself to the Committee, noting her introduction meeting with the Chair. Assistant Deputy Minister Drummond expressed her support for the Committee and indicated that her team would continue to assist the Committee in all aspects of its work, towards the submission of the Final Recommendations Report to the Minister.

M 16.5 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks for this portion of the meeting and requested that Committee members send her and Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff any key messages they felt had emerged from the meeting. The Chair thanked the Committee for the morning’s discussion, and noted that the afternoon session would re-convene at 1:00 p.m.

Meeting 2 information

Date: Thursday, October 21, 2021 from 1:00pm-2:30pm

Location: virtual

Meeting 2 present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Ben Smith, Jane Ste. Marie, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco, Stephen Andrews, Victoria Nolan and Lindy Zaretsky.

Non-Voting Member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Regrets: None

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Sonya Del Monte, Paul Challen, Alex Ibrahim, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu, and Ann Louise Fitzpatrick.

Captionist: Gemme Hummeny

ASL Interpreters: Kate Lewis, Gloria Brifoglio

Meeting 2 minutes

M 16.6 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair provided welcome remarks and thanked all members for their participation in the morning session, and for their return for the afternoon meeting. The Chair suggested that the planned October 26 meetings be used for small-group meetings, rather than for a meeting of the entire Committee. Members noted that if this approach were to be adopted, consideration would need to be given to members who are part of multiple groups.

Members also inquired about how the ongoing process for the Technical Sub-Committee. Staff noted that the Technical Sub-Committee would be meeting in mid-November and will keep the Committee posted as to their progress, with the intent of submitting the Technical Sub-Committee report to both the K-12 and Postsecondary Education Committees Staff also noted that public feedback on the Technical Sub-Committee Initial Recommendations Report was included in the summary the Committee has already received.

M 16.7 Ministry update on next steps

Ministry staff provided an overview of next steps that are required for the Committee before the Final Recommendations Report can be submitted to the Minister. Members asked if the final report will be posted. Staff noted that the Ministry has posted the final reports for all Standards Development Committees.

Members noted that the Committee’s report should be submitted as soon as possible to the Minister, and that the Technical Sub-Committee report can follow. Members also noted that while overall response to the Initial Recommendations Report was good, the diversity of responses (particularly within the disability community) was poor and further consultation may be needed.

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility noted that concerns about gaps in perspective can be noted in the narrative/transmission letter that accompanies the final report submission.

M 16.8 Committee discussion: Overview of Public Feedback for Small Group Five: Organizational Barriers

The small group working on this barrier area noted they would appreciate more time to meet and review feedback. Members noted the need to consider the complexity of the subject of exclusion – and the need to balance students’ rights with the need for staff and student safety. Members also expressed strong support for inter-ministerial collaboration on this issue.

Members noted there exists a good amount of feedback from the public noting that an exceptionality definition that leaves out certain groups (i.e., Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder community) should not be used. Members also noted the need to get away from “special education” and “special needs” language, and the need to consider presenting this barrier area at the start of the final report as it sets a framework for the rest of the recommendations.

M 16.9 Barrier area summaries from small groups

Members from the Attitudes, Behaviours, Perceptions and Assumptions; Awareness and Training, Digital Learning and Technology; Social Realms; Physical and Architectural Barriers; Planning for Emergencies and Safety Framework; and Timelines and Accountability small groups provided updates to the larger Committee.

Updates included revisions supporting the greater use of Universal Design; and the request for enhanced teacher training via Ministry of Education. Members from the Physical and Architectural Barriers group noted that they will be providing subsequent feedback. The Committee expressed interest in knowing how the Minister has used the original feedback provided in June regarding the Planning for Emergencies and Safety Framework area. The non-voting member from Ministry of Education noted the ways in which the government has taken on the advice from the Committee in relation to emergency planning, and that further updates would be available in future meetings.

M 16.10 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the members for their commitment to moving ahead on the next steps as indicated. Chair and staff noted that the small groups would be meeting on the morning of October 26, and the afternoon would be a full Committee meeting. The Chair also invited Members to send feedback on small-group leads if they cannot attend meeting, and welcomed all members to send in key messages on today’s discussion and keep her informed on progress of small group meeting.

K-12 education meeting 15: Tuesday January 19, 2021

Letter from chair to the minister

March 2, 2021

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
5^th Floor, 777 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister Cho,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Meeting 15 – Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the Meeting (“Meeting 15”) held on January 19, 2021 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

The Committee reviewed and provided feedback on the Initial Recommendations Report and the summaries of barrier areas and recommendations contained in the report, along with the Education Technical Sub-Committee Report. The Committee successfully completed a final vote on the Initial Recommendations Report and the Education Technical Sub-Committee Report.

Looking ahead, the Committee will make final edits to both reports in preparation for submitting them to you and for the purposes of posting for public feedback.

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting 1 information

Date: Tuesday January 19, 2021 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

Location: virtual

All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Meeting 1 present

Non-voting member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Regrets: Ben Smith

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Vena Persaud, Sonya Del Monte, Paul Challen, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu and Ann Louise Fitzpatrick

Captionist: Kim Johnson

Meeting 1 minutes

M 15.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks to the Committee as well as an outline of the key deliverables for the meeting. She thanked members for all their continued dedication and commitment to the work.

M 15.2 Overview of timelines and next steps of the Committee

Ministry staff provided an overview of tentative timelines and next steps of Committee’s work in preparation for submitting the Initial Recommendations Report to the Minister and for posting it publicly.

M 15.3 Committee discussion – review of the small group executive summaries

Committee members provided final feedback on their summaries of barrier areas and recommendations that will accompany the posting of the Initial Recommendations Report.

M 15.4 Committee discussion – review of the education technical sub-committee recommendations report

Jack Stadnyk provided an overview of the changes to the Education Technical Sub-Committee report. The members provided their final comments on the transition recommendations. After discussion, a few members stayed on during the break to make changes for Committee review at the next meeting.

M 15.5 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the Committee for providing detailed feedback on the summaries and sub-committee report. The Chair reminded members to provide key messages for the morning meeting electronically following the meeting and to attend the afternoon meeting from 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

Meeting 2 information

Date: Tuesday January 19, 2021 from 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

Location: virtual

All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Meeting 2 present

Non-voting member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Regrets: Stephen Andrews and Victoria Nolan

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Vena Persaud, Sonya Del Monte, Paul Challen, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu and Ann Louise Fitzpatrick

Captionist: Kim Johnson

Meeting 2 minutes

M 15.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks and thanked all members for their return for the afternoon meeting. The Chair also thanked the members who stayed on to make the changes to the Education Technical Sub-Committee Report.

M 15.2 continued Committee discussion (if needed) – review of the education technical sub-committee recommendations report

Members reviewed the changes to the sub-committee report, which included minor edits to titles and recommendations. The Committee agreed on incorporating the sub-committee report into the Initial Recommendations Report after section seven.

Motion 15.1 education technical sub-committee report.

The Committee held a successful vote on the Education Technical Sub-Committee Report.

M 15.3 Committee discussion: review and finalize the initial recommendations report

Members provided final edits and feedback on the Initial Recommendations Report. Members noted that they are proud of the final version of their initial recommendations and look forward to submitting to the Minister for the purposes of public feedback.

Motion: 15.2 initial recommendations report

The Committee held a successful vote on the Initial Recommendations Report.

M 15.4 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the members for all their dedication, commitment and exceptional work in their time together. The Chair reminded members to provide their key messages electronically and noted that she will follow-up regarding the next steps on the submission of the initial report.

K-12 education meeting 14: Thursday December 10, 2020

Letter from chair to the minister

March 2, 2021

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
5^th Floor, 777 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister Cho,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Meeting 14 – Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the Meeting (“Meeting 14”) held on December 10, 2020 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

Thank you, Minister Cho, for attending our afternoon meeting to provide introductory remarks and for introducing the Minister of Education, the Honourable Stephen Lecce. Minister Lecce provided encouraging and congratulatory remarks to the Committee on the accomplishment of their work. The Committee also heard remarks from Nancy Naylor, Deputy Minister, Ministry of Education. The Committee reviewed and provided feedback on the draft Education Technical Sub-Committee Report. Committee members reviewed an example of an executive summary for small groups and focus group script. The Committee also provided feedback for the next draft of the Initial Recommendations Report.

Looking ahead to the Committee’s next virtual meeting in January, the Committee will be reviewing the Initial Recommendations Report and the Education Technical Sub-Committee Report in preparation for the submission of the Initial Recommendations Report.

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s ongoing progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting 1 information

Date: December 10, 2020 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

Location: virtual

All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Meeting 1 present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Ben Smith, Jane Ste. Marie, Victoria Nolan, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Non-voting member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Vena Persaud, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu and Ann Louise Fitzpatrick

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility Minister’s Office: Mark DeMontis

Guests: Ministry of Education, Deputy Minister Nancy Naylor

Captionist: Gemme Humenny

Meeting 1 minutes

M 14.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

M 14.2 Remarks from Deputy Minister Nancy Naylor, Ministry of Education

Deputy Minister Nancy Naylor (Ministry of Education) provided remarks to the Committee. Deputy Minister Naylor noted how impressed she is by the depth and breadth of recommendations the Committee has made thus far. She looks forward to reviewing the finalized Initial Recommendations Report.

M 14.3 Overview of the draft education technical sub-committee report

Committee member Jack Stadnyk provided an overview of the draft Education Technical Sub-Committee Report. The Committee had an opportunity to provide feedback on the content and approach of the report. The next Education Technical Sub-Committee meeting will take place on December 14, 2020 where they aim to incorporate the feedback from the K-12 Education and the Post-Secondary Education Committees.

M 14.4 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the Committee for providing detailed feedback on the draft report. The Chair reminded members to provide key messages for the morning meeting electronically following the meeting and to attend the afternoon meeting from 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

Meeting 2 information

Date: December 10, 2020 from 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

Location: virtual

All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Meeting 2 Present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith, Jane Ste. Marie, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Non-voting member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Vena Persaud, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu and Ann Louise Fitzpatrick

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility Minister’s Office: Mark DeMontis

Guests: The Honourable Raymond Cho, Minister for Seniors and Accessibility and the Honourable Stephen Lecce, Minister of Education

Captionist: Gemme Humenny

Meeting 2 minutes

M 14.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo, provided welcome remarks and thanked all members for their participation in both meetings.

M 14.2 Committee discussion: review of examples for executive summary and focus group

Committee members Lindy Zaretsky and Sheila McWatters provided their examples of an executive summary for small group recommendations and focus group script for Committee review and feedback.

M 14.3 Introductory Remarks from the Honourable Raymond Cho, Minister for Seniors and Accessibility

Minister Cho introduced Minister Lecce to the Committee meeting.

M 14.4 Remarks from the Honourable Stephen Lecce, Minister of Education

Minister Lecce provided encouraging and congratulatory remarks to the Committee on the development of their work and looks forward to receiving the report in the new year.

M 14.5 Committee discussion – review of the Initial Recommendations Report

The Chair led a discussion on the review of the Initial Recommendations Report and provided an opportunity for members to provide feedback on the next draft of the report.

M 14.6 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the members for their participation in both virtual meetings. The Chair reminded members to provide their key messages electronically and that the next virtual meetings will take place on January 18 or 19, 2021.

K-12 education meeting 13: Friday November 27, 2020

Letter from chair to the minister

Date: January 19, 2021

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
5^th Floor, 777 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister Cho,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Meeting 13 – Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the virtual meeting (“Meeting 13”) held on November 27, 2020 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

The Committee heard an update on the work of the Education Technical Sub-Committee. The timelines and accountability small group presented their revised timelines and recommendations for Committee feedback. The Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility provided an overview of the approach to the design of the survey for the public posting of the Initial Recommendations Report. The Committee also provided feedback for the next draft of the Initial Recommendations Report.

The Committee appreciates you providing congratulatory remarks to the Committee and looks forward to sending you the Initial Recommendations Report.

Looking ahead to the Committee’s next virtual meeting, the Committee will be reviewing the Initial Recommendations Report and the Education Technical Sub-Committee Report in preparation for the submission of the report.

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s ongoing progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting 1 information

Date: November 27, 2020 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

Location: virtual

All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Present: meeting 1

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Vena Persaud, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu and Ann Louise Fitzpatrick

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility Minister’s Office Staff: Minister Raymond Cho and Mark DeMontis

Non-voting member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Captionist: Gemme Humenny

Regrets: Stephen Andrews and Victoria Nolan

Meeting 1 minutes

M 13.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks to the Committee as well as an outline of the key deliverables for the meeting and thanked members for all their hard work within their small groups.

M 13.2 overview of the survey design for the Initial Recommendations Report

Ministry staff provided an overview of the approach to the design of the survey when the initial recommendations are posted for public feedback. Members provided feedback and comments on the design.

M 13.3 update on the work of the Education Technical Sub-Committee

Jack Stadnyk provided an update on the work of the Education Technical Sub-Committee. The sub-committee had a meeting on November 9, 2020 where they reviewed their draft recommendations and started to compile their report. Their next sub-committee meeting will take place on December 3, 2020, where they aim to finalize their report.

M 13.4 remarks from the Minister Raymond Cho of the Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility

The Minister provided congratulatory remarks to the Committee on the near completion of the first stage of their work. The Minister looks forward to receiving the Committee’s initial recommendations and has commended the committee on its important work.

M 13.5 review of the updated accountability and timelines small group report and recommendations

Doug Mein provided an update on the work of the timelines and accountability small group. The small group presented their updated draft timelines for the Committee’s recommendations. The Committee provided feedback and will follow-up with electronic feedback. The small group will revise the timelines based on member feedback for an electronic vote.

M 13.6 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the Committee for all their collaborative and dedicated work. The Chair reminded members to provide key messages for the morning meeting noting that the next meeting will take place on December 10, 2020.

Meeting 2 information

Date: November 27, 2020 from 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

Location: virtual

Format of committee minutes and references: For the purposes of referencing Committee documents and items in the minutes: ‘M’ (Meeting) represents the meeting number/minute items/sections/action items and ‘Partial’ represents limited attendance. Motion represents a vote that has occurred. All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Present: meeting 2

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Mike Cyr, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith, Jane Ste. Marie, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Vena Persaud, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu and Ann Louise Fitzpatrick

Non-voting member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Captionist: Gemme Humenny

Regrets: Stephen Andrews and Donna Edwards

Meeting 2 minutes

M 13.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks and thanked all members for their participation in both meetings.

M 13.2 Committee discussion – review of the Initial Recommendations Report

The Chair led a discussion on the review of the Initial Recommendations Report and provided an opportunity for members to provide feedback on the next draft of the report.

M 13.3 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the members for their participation in both virtual meetings. The Chair reminded members to provide their key messages electronically noting that the next virtual meeting will take place on December 10, 2020.

K-12 education meeting 12: Thursday November 12, 2020

Letter from chair to the minister

Date: January 19, 2021

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
5^th Floor, 777 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister Cho,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Meeting 12 – Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the virtual meeting (“Meeting 12”) held on November 12, 2020 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

The Committee heard an update on the work of the Education Technical Sub-Committee and the timelines and accountability small group. The Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility provided an overview of the next steps of the Committee after the Initial Recommendations Report is submitted to the minister. Small group three: Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment and small group five: Organizational barriers presented revised recommendations related to learning skills and executive function and data collection. At the meeting, the Committee voted on and passed five recommendations within small group three and five barrier areas, in addition to the glossary of terms.

Looking ahead to the Committee’s next virtual meeting, the Committee will be reviewing any final small group recommendations and the Initial Recommendations Report in preparation for their submission to you and posting for public feedback.

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s ongoing progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting 1 information

Date: November 12, 2020 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

Location: virtual

All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Present: meeting 1

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith, Jane Ste. Marie, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Vena Persaud, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu and Ann Louise Fitzpatrick

Non-voting member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Captionist: Gemme Humenny

Meeting 1 minutes

M 12.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks to the Committee, and provided an outline of the key deliverables for the meeting and thanked members for all their hard work within their small groups.

M 12.2 overview and next steps of the submission and posting of the initial recommendations report

Ministry staff provided an overview of the next steps after the submission of the Initial Recommendations Report.

M 12.3 update on the work of the Education Technical Sub-Committee

Jack Stadnyk provided an update on the work of the Education Technical Sub-Committee. The sub-committee had a meeting on November 9, 2020 where they reviewed their draft recommendations and started to pull together their report. Their next sub-committee meeting will take place on December 3, 2020.

M 12.4 update on the work of the timelines and accountability small group

Stephen Andrews and David Lepofsky provided an update on the work of the timelines and accountability small group. The small group presented their potential draft timelines for the Committee’s recommendations. The Committee provided feedback and will follow-up with electronic feedback. The small group will revise the timelines based on member feedback.

M 12.5 small group five (Organizational barriers) discussion on data collection recommendation

Motion 12.1 carried – barrier five: recommendations on data collection

Small group five presented their revised recommendations related to data collection for Committee discussion and feedback. As a result, the Committee voted on the following recommendations.

The K-12 Education Accessibility Standard should require the following of any school board and of the Ministry of Education where it operates schools:

Collect and analyze annual data on the number of students who are accessing professional services and assessments provided by regulated health professionals and other specialists, both from school board services and community partners who delivery services in schools. Further the data collected should be in compliance with a standardized protocol designed by the Ministry of Education (see also data collection recommendation four). Data collected should include the number of days students wait for the assessments and be publicly reported.

Ministry of Education shall:

Collect all of the above data from each school board and:
- publicly report on the data referred to above, as an aggregate and on a school board by school board basis
- identify changes over previous year(s) and any gaps or deficits or areas for improvement
- develop a provincial action plan to resolve gaps or unmet needs
Redesign the mandatory contents of the Individualized Educational Plan’s to support collection of data about students with disabilities and the accommodations, or programs and services, which are required to support their needs.
Provide a standardized provincial rubric for documenting the number of professional and specialist assessments provided by each school board annually that includes information on the prioritization criteria used in referring students for assessments and the length of time from identification of the need for the assessment and the assessment completion and results shared.

M 12.6 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the Committee for all their collaborative and dedicated work. The Chair reminded members to provide key messages for the morning meeting and the next meeting will take place on November 27, 2020.

Meeting 2 information

Date: November 12, 2020 from 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

Location: virtual

Present: meeting 2

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith, Jane Ste. Marie, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Vena Persaud, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu and Ann Louise Fitzpatrick

Non-voting member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Captionist: Gemme Humenny

Regrets: Stephen Andrews

Meeting 2 minutes

M 12.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks and thanked all members for their participation in both meetings.

M 12.2 small group three (Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment) discuss additions to Committee recommendations and glossary of terms

Small group three provided their revised recommendation related to learning skills and executive function. Small group three presented the revised glossary of terms and incorporated member feedback. As a result, the Committee voted on the glossary of terms and the following recommendation.

Motion 12.2 carried – barrier three: recommendation on learning skills and executive function

That the design, development, and communication of curriculum (resources and lived experiences) ensure the following: full accessibility, equity and inclusion in supporting barrier free accessibility for students with disabilities, cultural perspectives and responsiveness, Universal Design for Learning, the dignity, developing independence and ongoing learning for each person. This requires that:

the Ministry of Education and boards incorporate Universal Design for Learning in the requirements for curriculum design.
the ministry process for review and renewal of curriculum use principles of accessibility, equity and inclusion in design and development, ensuring full accessibility of curriculum for students with disabilities
the ministry identify a ministry designated office or person with lead responsibility for the ongoing review of all provincially mandated curriculum (and secondary resources guidelines offered to school boards) for removal of accessibility barriers
the ministry mandate a strategy and action plan for continuous review of all curriculum requiring that all reviewed and new curriculum address accessibility barriers and is barrier free

Curriculum review and renewal in curriculum areas, include specific focus areas, such as:

science, technology, engineering and mathematics
science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics
alternative, expanded curriculum for students with disabilities that is barrier free and addresses relevant life skills
curriculum that is responsive to cultures, history, experiences and perspectives of students and communities; multiple language-based curriculum. For example, non-verbal, sign - American Sign Language, Indigenous languages
curriculum that ensures anti-Black racist education, includes and represents diversity, and differing identities that intersect with disabilities
curriculum design that is responsive, includes cultural diversity across subject areas, ensures equity, addresses social and cultural perspectives, includes Indigenous ways of knowing
new and developing curriculum areas and competencies such as multi-literacies, (for example, digital literacy, financial literacy that is designed and integrated within specific courses including career studies, mathematics and across curriculum
curriculum that addresses experiential learning, employability skills development, specialty pathways such as Specialist High Skills Major and school to work transitions.
curriculum that focuses on the development of learning skills that specifically address executive functioning skills (for example, emotional and physical self-regulation, working memory, self-monitoring, organizational planning and prioritizing, and task initiation). The development of these skills is critical to accessing learning for all, and student achievement and well-being

M 12.3 presentation and discussion on transitions recommendations

Jack Stadnyk and Lindy Zaretsky provided an overview of recommendations related to transitions within K-12, Post-secondary Education and to the workforce. The Committee had a thoughtful discussion and provided feedback. The recommendations will be provided to the Education Technical Sub-Committee for their review as they finalize their report.

M 12.4 Committee discussion: review of the Initial Recommendations Report

The Chair led a discussion on the review of the background, vision and methodology sections of the Initial Recommendations Report. The members were very supportive and provided feedback on the draft sections of the report.

M 12.5 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the members for their participation in both virtual meetings. The Chair reminded members to provide their key messages electronically and the next virtual meetings will take place on November 27, 2020.

K-12 education meeting 11: Thursday October 29, 2020

Letter from chair to the minister

Date: January 19, 2021

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
5^th Floor, 777 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister Cho,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Meeting 11 – Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the virtual meeting (“Meeting 11”) held on Thursday October 29, 2020 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

The Committee heard an update on the work of the Education Technical Sub-Committee. Small group three – Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment and small group five: Organizational Barriers presented revised recommendations related to early identification and data collection. At the meeting, the Committee voted on and passed one recommendation related to early and on-going assessment for students with disabilities’ needs. The meeting concluded with a Committee discussion on the glossary of terms and sections of the Initial Recommendations Report.

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s ongoing progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting 1 information

Date: October 29, 2020 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

Location: virtual

All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Present: meeting 1

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith, Jane Ste. Marie, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu and Ann Louise Fitzpatrick

Non-voting member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Ministry of Education staff: Charmaine Perera, Bobbi Clifton and David Moore

Captionist: Gemme Humenny

Regrets: Stephen Andrews and Mike Cyr

Meeting 1 minutes

M 11.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

M 11.2 housekeeping and logistical information

Ministry staff provided an overview of the virtual meeting logistics.

M 11.3 update from the education technical sub-committee

Jack Stadnyk provided an update on the work of the Education Technical Sub-Committee.

M 11.4 presentation and discussion on transitions recommendations

Lindy Zaretsky provided an overview of recommendations related to transitions within K-12, Post-Secondary Education and to the workforce. The Committee had a thoughtful discussion and provided feedback. The recommendations will be provided to the Education Technical Sub-Committee for review.

M 11.5 small group three (curriculum, instruction and assessment) discussion on early identification recommendation

Small group three provided a revised recommendation related to early and on-going assessment for students with disabilities. As a result of Committee discussion and review, the members voted on the following recommendation.

Motion 11.1 carried – barrier three: recommendations on early identification assessment and accountability

Early and on-going assessment for students with disabilities’ needs

The Education Accessibility Standard directed through Ministry of Education and boards establishes measures and processes to address and eliminate administrative and other access barriers that impede or delay timely and fair/unbiased assessments for the identification of disability related need. These assessments include but are not limited to professional and clinical assessments such as psycho-educational, and other educational assessments in the identification of disability related needs:

where there are barriers related to timely access to identification or needs assessments, the board will have a solution-based process to address the assessment needs which may include a plan to access clinical assessments through partnership with external service providers. And where the board provides evidence to the ministry that it is experiencing barriers to timely access of clinical professional services for assessment related to the identification of disability related needs, and the board continues to plan for a clear solutions-based process, the ministry will support the board in securing the necessary assessments
district school boards shall identify on an annual basis their unmet professional assessment needs of students with disabilities as evidenced through the Data Collection Standard (Standards Development Committee) and seek timely access to disability related assessments with the support of the Ministry of Education. The ministry shall take action to review and address access barriers to disability related assessments
pending a necessary assessment, the school board has a duty to accommodate and cannot refuse to accommodate a student’s need due to delay in getting an assessment performed that has been requested by the board. There are many educational assessments including on-going evidence-based classroom assessments that can inform how a student learns best

M 11.6 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the Committee for all their collaborative and dedicated work. The Chair reminded members to provide key messages for the morning meeting and the next meeting will take place on November 12, 2020.

Meeting 2 information

Date: October 29, 2020 from 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

Location: virtual

Present: meeting 2

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu and Ann Louise Fitzpatrick

Non-voting member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Ministry of Education staff: Charmaine Perera, Bobbi Clifton and David Moore

Captionist: Gemme Humenny

Regrets: Stephen Andrews and Mike Cyr

Meeting 2 minutes

M 11.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks and thanked all members for their participation in both meetings.

M 11.2 small group five (Organizational barriers) discussion on data collection recommendation

Small group five presented their revised recommendations related to data collection for Committee discussion and feedback. The small group will revise the recommendation based on member feedback and circulate for electronic vote.

M 11.3 Committee discussion on the glossary of terms

Small group three took the initiative to revise and collate the Committee’s glossary of terms. Members had the opportunity to provide their thoughts on the format and content of the glossary. Small group three will make the revisions based on member feedback and the glossary will be included as an appendix to the Initial Recommendations Report.

M 11.4 Committee discussion – drafting the Initial Recommendations Report

The Chair led a discussion on the review of the introduction and narratives for the barrier area sections for the Initial Recommendations Report. The members were very supportive and agreed with the draft sections thus far. The Chair said more sections will follow for Committee review and feedback.

M 11.5 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the members for their participation in both virtual meetings. The Chair reminded members to provide their key messages electronically and the next virtual meetings will take place on November 12, 2020.

K-12 education meeting 10: Tuesday October 6, 2020

Letter from chair to the minister

Date: January 19, 2021

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
5^th Floor, 777 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister Cho,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Meeting 9 – Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the virtual meeting (“Meeting 10”) held on Tuesday October 6, 2020 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

The Committee heard a presentation from the Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility’s Compliance and Enforcement Branch. Ministry staff provided an overview of the compliance framework under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act and answered member questions to support them in finalizing their initial recommendations.

At the meeting, the Committee voted on and passed four sections of recommendations. Each of the sections included several recommendations addressing service animals, data collection, professional learning and school board accessibility committees and plans.

Looking ahead to the Committee’s next virtual meeting, the Committee will be reviewing small group recommendations and sections of the Initial Recommendations Report in preparation for their submission to you and posting for public feedback.

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s ongoing progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting 1 information

Date: October 6, 2020 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

Location: virtual

All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Present: meeting 1

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Ben Smith, Jane Ste. Marie, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu and Ann Louise Fitzpatrick

Non-voting member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Ministry of Education staff: Charmaine Perera, Bobbi Clifton and David Moore

Captionist: Gemme Humenny

Interpreters: Gloria Brifoglio and Sean Power

Regrets: Ashleigh Molloy, Victoria Nolan and Jack Stadnyk

Meeting 1 minutes

M 10.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks to the Committee, and provided an outline of the key deliverables for the meeting. The Chair congratulated the Committee on successful electronic votes on the Physical and Architectural and Organizational barrier recommendations. The Chair thanked the members for their feedback on a plain language writer and provided an update on the initial recommendations report, which she confirmed would be shared with members for feedback in the upcoming weeks. The Chair concluded with an overview of the meeting agenda and goals for the day.

M 10.2 housekeeping and logistical information

Ministry staff provided an overview of the virtual meeting logistics.

M 10.3 ministry presentation and discussion – compliance and enforcement

Garth Napier, Director of the Compliance and Enforcement Branch of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Division provided introductory remarks and welcomed Nuhaad Abbas, Manager of Compliance and Enforcement Operations to provide a brief presentation outlining the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Division’s compliance framework. Nuhaad provided an overview of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Division’s approach to enforcement as well as its role as a modern regulator. The presentation concluded with Committee discussion and follow-up questions.

The committee was appreciative of the presentation. Lynn Ziraldo requested that representatives from the Ministry of Education provide a similar presentation to the small group responsible for timelines and accountability.

M 10.4 update from the planning for emergencies and safety small group – discussion and follow-up with electronic vote

Donna Edwards, from the small group addressing planning for emergencies and safety, provided an update on the progress of the group’s work and discussed their approach to their recommendations and framework. The Chair provided members with an opportunity to express any concerns and confirmed these recommendations would be circulated for electronic voting.

M 10.5 update from the timelines and accountability small group: discussion and follow-up with electronic vote

Stephen Andrews provided an update on the work of the timelines and accountability small group. The committee discussed the need for consistency between the language in the group’s recommendations and those used by the ministry. The group reiterated the importance of hearing from the Ministry of Education on their compliance and oversight activities to inform their recommendations.

The Chair confirmed that once these recommendations have been finalized, an electronic vote will be held.

M 10.6 small group three (curriculum, instruction and assessment) discussion on additional recommendation

Prior to the meeting, an additional recommendation regarding the need for early and on-going assessment for students with disabilities’ needs was submitted by one of the committee members. This recommendation was provided to the curriculum, instruction and assessment group for consideration.

The new recommendation was presented to the committee and members’ provided feedback. The committee agreed that voting on this recommendation will be deferred until the small group has an opportunity for further discussion. The curriculum, instruction and assessment group also confirmed they are currently reviewing the glossary of terms developed by each group and would circulate a draft to the committee.

M 10.7 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the Committee for their hard work. She also advised that an additional meeting date in early November may be required. The Chair reminded members to provide key messages for the morning meeting.

Meeting 2 information

Date: October 6, 2020 from 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

Location: virtual

Present: meeting 2

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith, Jane Ste. Marie, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu and Ann Louise Fitzpatrick

Non-voting member: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Ministry of Education staff: Charmaine Perera, Bobbi Clifton and David Moore

Captionist: Gemme Humenny

Interpreters: Gloria Brifoglio and Sean Power

Regrets: Ashleigh Molloy and Jack Stadnyk

Meeting 2 minutes

M 10.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks and thanked all members for their participation in both meetings.

M 10.2 small group six (social realms) discussion on service animals recommendations

Small group six presented their revised recommendations related to service animals based on the previous meeting’s discussion and committee feedback. The Committee passed several recommendations under this key area related to service animals.

Motion 10.1 carried - barrier six: recommendations on service animals
Recommendation 11. Service animals:

We therefore recommend:

11.1 When a student with disabilities or their parent/guardian request permission for the student to bring a trained service animal to school with them as an accommodation to their disability, the school board shall consider, decide upon that request, and give reasons for its decision, in accordance with the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, with the duty to accommodate students with disabilities under the Ontario Human Rights Code, with the policy of the Ontario Human Rights Commission on the duty to accommodate people with disabilities and the Commission’s Policy on accessible education for students with disabilities and with the following requirements set out in this Accessibility Standard. This includes requests regarding a trained service animal from an accredited training organization that provided training to the animal and to the student. Where the service animal was not trained by an accredited training organization, it is open to the student or their family to present to the school board satisfactory evidence that both the service animal and the student have received sufficient training.
11.2 The school board shall put in place a fair and speedy procedure for considering requests for a student to bring a service animal to school. This procedure should include the following:
- if the school board has any objection to or concerns about the request, the school board will immediately notify the student and family about the specific concerns, and shall work to resolve them, in a manner consistent with the Ontario Human Rights Code
- if the school board does not believe that the service animal could assist the student at school, the school board should investigate the request, including how the student' benefits from the service animal outside the school and in the home
- if the school board has any concerns about the feasibility of allowing the student to bring the service animal to school, it shall investigate the experience of other school boards and schools which have successfully enabled a student to bring their service animal to school
- if a concern is expressed that the service animal at school would interfere with the human rights of other students or staff, the school board shall take action to effectively accommodate their rights without sacrificing the human rights of the student using the service animal, in accordance with the policy of the Ontario Human Rights Commission on conflicting rights. For example, if an Education Assistant, assigned to work with the student, cannot work with the service animal for health or other human rights reasons, the school board shall facilitate the assignment of this responsibility to another staff member
- a student shall not be refused the opportunity to bring a qualified service animal to school without the school board first allowing a trial or test period with the service animal at school
- where it is proposed to allow a student with disabilities to bring a service animal to school, the school board shall work out with the student, their family, and the organization providing the service animal, a plan to promote the success of the accommodation, including such things as:
  - allowing the service animal’s training organization to provide training in the school to school staff
  - allowing the training organization to provide an orientation to the student population at the school to the presence of the service animal
  - providing information to other families to reinforce the inclusion of the service animal at school
- if the school board does not agree to the service animal being allowed at school, or if there is a problem with implementing the school board’s plans to facilitate its inclusion, the school board shall make available a swift dispute resolution process, including independent mediation if needed, to resolve these issues
11.3 the Ministry of Education shall obtain information from school boards on where service animals have been allowed in school, to make it easier for a school board to reach out to those schools to gather information, if needed
11.4 nothing in this accessibility standard shall reduce or restrict the rights of a person with vision loss who is coming to a school bringing with them their guide dog, trained by an accredited school for training guide dogs

Vote passed.

M 10.3 small group five presentation and discussion: Organizational barriers

Small group five presented their updated recommendations to address organizational barriers for Committee review and vote. The small group passed a number of recommendations under each of the following key areas: data collection, school board accessibility committees and plans, and professional learning. The small group will review a recommendation related to data collection after more member feedback and follow-up with an electronic vote.

Motion 10.2 carried – barrier five: recommendations on data collection
6. Data collection:

6.1 The K-12 Education Accessibility Standard should require the following of any school board and of the Ministry of Education where it operates schools:

collect data on students with all types of disability as defined in the Ontario Human Rights Code and Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, using Individual Education Plan, the Individual, Placement, and Review Committees, and such other methods that the ministry and, school boards devise, rather than only collecting data on students with an “exceptionality” as defined under current Ontario special education laws:
- data should be collected about students with disabilities that is consistent and comparable across the province according to the parameters below:
- data collection should accurately report the numbers of students with each kind of disability. Where a student has more than one disability, each disability would be separately counted
data should also be collected on the accommodations, or programs and services that are to be provided to the student
collect student data on all incidences of exclusion/refusal to admit, consistent with the recommendations related to exclusions and modified days in Section 7. The data collected should include whether the student has a disability, the nature of the incident, the length of the exclusion/refusal to admit, reasons for the exclusion/modification in writing, the educational services provided to the student while excluded from school and the plan for return to full time school attendance
collect student data on the number of students who are on a modified day, including reason for modified day, duration, and appeals, if any, as well as about the alternative education program provided
collect and analyze annual school board data on the number of students who are accessing board requested professional services and assessments, the number of days on wait lists for these services to ensure students with disabilities have access to professional services in a prompt and timely manner
collect information on the numbers of staff with specialized expertise relating to students with disabilities such as:
- teachers of the deaf and hard of hearing
- teachers of the visually impaired
- applied behavioural analysists
- speech-language pathologists
- audiologists
- physiotherapists, occupational therapists
- assistive technology
- other key personnel
publicly report on an annual basis data related to disability, exclusions, modified day, wait times for professional assessments, and the number and types of staff who instruct students with disabilities

Ministry of Education shall:

6.2 collect all of the above data from each school board and:
- publicly report on the data referred to above, as an aggregate and on a school board by school by school board basis
- identify changes over previous year(s) and any gaps or deficits or areas for improvement
6.3 redesign the mandatory contents of the Individual Education Plan’s to support collection of data about students with disabilities and the accommodations, or programs and services, which are required to support their needs.

Ministry of Education/Equity Secretariat shall:

6.4 ensure the collection of student census data includes information about disability, including the type of disability, or disabilities, the intersectionality of disability with other key factors such as race, indigenous identity, sexual identity and socio-economic factors. Data collection should be based on processes and questions that are consistent for all school boards
6.5 analyze data related to disability and report publicly on information related to the number and types of disabilities and the intersectionality of disability with other factors. In addition, the data should be linked to student outcomes and achievements, including graduation rates, credit accumulation, course selection and other measures.
6.6 use disability information and analysis to identify gaps and develop plans to improve the outcomes and achievement of students with disabilities

Vote passed.

Motion 10.3 carried – barrier five: recommendations on school board accessibility committees and plans
7. School board accessibility committees and plans:

7.1 The K-12 Education Accessibility Standard should require the following of any school board and of the schools operated by the Ministry of Education to:
- establish an Accessibility Committee and develop multi-year accessibility plans that identify barriers, establish plans to eliminate the barriers and ensure compliance with accessibility standards
- designate an accessibility lead staff reporting to the Director of Education
- ensure that the membership of the school board Accessibility Committee includes senior board officials with responsibility for human resources, teaching and learning, physical facilities, information technology, procurement, transportation, as well as students and individuals with disabilities
- assign the respective responsibilities of the lead staff and committee members to oversee the planning and monitoring of accessibility compliance with the accessibility standards
- systematically review educational programming, services, facilities, and equipment to identify recurring accessibility barriers within that organization that can impede the full and effective participation and inclusion of students with disabilities, as well as strategies to eliminate those barriers
- mandate that the contents of the accessibility plan to include:
  - processes to identify accessibility barriers, including complaints/reports from schools, students, and community members
  - plans for removing and preventing accessibility barriers
  - clear assignment of responsibilities for action
  - performance measures for monitoring progress
  - requirements to report to the school board's trustees regularly
  - requirements for seeking input from the school board's Special Education Advisory Committee
  - an annual report on progress towards the elimination of accessibility barriers
  - feedback mechanisms to collect and review input from School Accessibility Committees, staff students and the community
- require school boards to publicly report on the Accessibility Plan and progress to implementation, as well as a summary of feedback on accessibility barriers and strategies
7.2 the Ministry of Education should be required to designate an office or role, such as an Assistant Deputy Minister, responsible for achieving a barrier-free and accessible school system for students with disabilities. This office or person, should have in place a permanent advisory committee representing individuals with disabilities, including students, that are representative of both high-incidence and low-incidence disabilities. As part of the role, the office or lead should publicly report on the progress of the ministry and school boards to improve accessibility annually
7.3 the Ministry of Education shall provide templates and resources to ensure consistency of processes and documentation for Accessibility Committees and Accessibility Plans.
7.4 The Ministry of Education shall provide school boards with accessibility expectations for programs and services
7.5 the Ministry of Education shall establish a publicly accessible depository and/or other mechanisms for the sharing of best practices with school boards and other stakeholders about accessible education programs, services, and facilities
7.6 the Ministry of Education should be required to annually:
- analyze the barriers and accessibility problems identified by each school board’s Accessibility Committee, and the actions identified or proposed for corrective action
- post a report to the public that identifies the recurring barriers experienced in Ontario school boards and share actions that are being taken or proposed to correct these. This includes the requirement to identify areas where corrective action has not being taken or where more is needed

B. district school boards shall:

7.7 establish at each school an Accessibility Committee that would include the Principal or designate, staff, students, families, and community groups, to identify accessibility barriers and possible solutions to address them. The Committee will provide input to the School Board Accessibility Committee and/or lead staff responsible for accessibility. This will ensure that accessibility barriers unique to each school are identified and addressed as quickly as possible
7.8 establish a dedicated resource within the school board, or shared among school boards, to convert instructional materials to an accessible format, where needed, on a timely basis
7.9 ensure that all schools create an accessible and welcoming environment for students with disabilities and their families, including those family members with disabilities. This includes ensuring schools encourage and make it easy to seek accommodations for their disabilities

Vote passed.

Motion 10.4 carried – barrier five: recommendations on professional learning
9. Professional learning:

A. Ministry of Education shall:

9.1 ensure that training is provided to teachers, and other staff, on new data collection methods for students with disabilities once standards are developed
9.2 develop training models on the use of clear definitions, common language and consistent practices and definitions to ensure clarity for staff, students, and parents
9.3 work with district school boards and community organizations to collaborate on the development of joint professional learning resources to support students with disabilities at school. This should include working with non-educators such as occupational therapists, medical practitioners, and paraprofessionals and parent/guardians to ensure diverse perspectives and expertise
9.4 ensure that training is provided to teachers, and other staff, on how to effectively support students with disabilities in experiential learning opportunities, and in the development and practice of employment skills

B. Ontario College of Teachers shall:

9.5 ensure that the mandatory qualifications to teach students who are blind/low vision be enhanced to provide the skills and knowledge to meet the needs of these students
9.6 work with the Ministry of Education and select faculties of education to initiate a Master’s level program in both French and English for teaching students who are blind/low vision such that exists in other jurisdictions
9.7 revise the guideline for Accreditation of Faculties of education:
- to add more credits on teaching students with disabilities in the pre-service program
- to add training on the duty to accommodate all students with disabilities
9.8 create and distribute a professional advisory to all certified teachers on the duty to accommodate students with disabilities and understand how to assist in their support

District school boards shall:

9.9 provide opportunities for the development of advocacy skills to parents and students with disabilities
9.10 develop resources and professional learning opportunities for teachers, and other staff, to better communicate with parents and encourage collaborative planning of Individual Education Plans
9.11 share best practices around fostering parent engagement with teachers and other staff

Vote passed.

M 10.4 small group one (attitudes, behaviours, perceptions and assumptions) discussion on full inclusion definition

The Committee had a thoughtful discussion on whether to keep the wording “full inclusion” in the small group one recommendation. Members came to a consensus to revise the recommendation to state “inclusion and full participation”. The small group members will work together to revise the recommendation for final review by the Committee.

M 10.5 Chair discussion: drafting the Initial Recommendations Report

The Chair summarized the feedback heard on using a plain language writer and had a thoughtful follow-up discussion on this. Some members are supportive of a plain language writer, while others expressed concerns around ensuring the intent of recommendations is not unintentionally altered through plain language. The Chair also discussed the next steps of the Committee drafting and finalizing the Initial Recommendations Report.

M 10.6 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the members for their participation in both virtual meetings. The Chair asked small groups to revise their recommendations based on Committee feedback to prepare for an electronic vote following the meeting. The Chair also reminded members to provide their key messages electronically. The next K-12 Education Standards Development Committee virtual meetings will take place on October 29, 2020.

K-12 education meeting 9: Thursday September 3, 2020

Letter from chair to the minister

Date: January 19, 2021

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
5^th Floor, 777 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister Cho,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Meeting 9 – Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the virtual meetings held on Thursday September 3, 2020 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

The Committee heard updates on the progress of the work from the following small groups: Physical and Architectural barriers, planning for emergencies and safety and timelines and accountability.

At the meeting, the Committee voted on and passed 15 recommendations. The Committee discussed the revised recommendations addressing barrier area three – Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment and passed ten recommendations addressing this area. The Committee had a successful discussion and passed four recommendations to address barrier area five: Organizational barriers. The Committee also reviewed recommendations addressing barrier area six – Social Realms and passed one recommendation.

Looking ahead to the Committee’s next virtual meeting, the Committee will be reviewing small group recommendations with the goal of finalizing recommendations for the Initial Recommendations Report.

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s ongoing progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting 1 information

Date: September 3, 2020 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

Location: virtual

All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Present: meeting 1

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk, Jane Ste. Marie, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu and Ann Louise Fitzpatrick

Ministry of Education staff: Charmaine Perera, Bobbi Clifton and David Moore

Captionist: Kim Johnson

Interpreters: Gloria Brifoglio and Sean Power

Regrets: Rita-Marie Hadley, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith and Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education (non-voting member)

Meeting 1 minutes

M 9.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks to the Committee, and provided an outline of the key deliverables for the meeting. The Chair congratulated the Committee on a successful electronic vote on the four digital learning and technology recommendations, which took place on August 21 to 26, 2020. The Chair thanked the Ministry of Education for providing answers to all of the Standards Development Committee related questions and providing the follow-up information from the data collection and capital ministry presentations. The Chair concluded with an overview of the meeting agenda and goals for the day.

M 9.2 housekeeping and logistical information

Ministry staff provided an overview of the virtual meeting logistics.

M 9.3 small group three presentation and discussion: Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment

Small group three presented their revised recommendations to address barriers related to Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment for Committee vote.

Motion 9.1 carried – barrier three: recommendation one

Rationale:

students’ cultural contexts are fundamental to their learning. Culture is defined here by a student’s identity as well as by their homes, schools, and communities. Creating culturally relevant curriculum, assessment practices, and instruction invites students to draw connections between their learning and direct experiences in their communities. To this end, teachers and students should perceive those experiences as valuable assets in all classrooms
All instruction is culturally responsive. The question is: To which culture is it currently oriented? By Gloria Ladson-Billings
curriculum and curriculum resources (designed, developed and/or procured) require barrier free accessibility, equity and inclusion for all students with disabilities. Curriculum, assessment, and instruction need to be culturally responsive and universally designed to ensure barrier free education for students with disabilities. As life-long learners and engaged citizens, all students with disabilities need to develop knowledge, skills, and attitudes enabling them to participate fully and actively in society

Curriculum and instruction recommendation one

That the design, development, provision and communication of curriculum (resources and lived experiences) ensure full accessibility, equity and inclusion in serving and supporting each learner addressing barrier free accessibility for students with disabilities, cultural perspectives and responsiveness, universal design for learning, the dignity and developing independence of each person, and ongoing learning for all.

This requires that:

the Ministry of Education and school boards, when setting requirements for curriculum design, ensure they incorporate universal design for learning, to make it accessible to students with disabilities
the ministry curriculum renewal processes apply principles of equity, accessibility and inclusion whereby the curriculum review and renewal processes include comprehensive review, design and development that ensures full accessibility of curriculum for students with disability

This requires that the ministry:

identify a ministry designated office or person with lead responsibility for the ongoing review of all provincially mandated curriculum (and secondary resources/ guidelines offered to school boards) for accessibility barriers, and revision of curriculum and secondary resource guidelines to remove barriers
mandate a strategy and action plan for continuous focused review of curriculum in each area or discipline including current and new curriculum. This requires that all reviewed curriculum and new curriculum design address any equity and accessibility barriers for students with disabilities and ensure newly developed curriculum is barrier free
an ongoing curriculum renewal strategy addressing equity and accessibility barriers for students with disabilities includes curriculum review and reform in all curriculum areas, including specific focus areas such as:
- science, technology, engineering and mathematics
- science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics
- development of alternative, expanded curriculum for students with disabilities that is barrier free and addresses relevant life skills
- curriculum that is responsive to cultures, history, experiences and perspectives of students and communities, multiple language-based curriculum (for example, non- verbal, American Sign Language and Indigenous languages)
- curriculum that ensures anti-racism education
- new and developing curriculum areas and competencies such as multi-literacies (for example digital literacy and financial literacy) that is designed and integrated within specific courses (for example, career studies, mathematics) and across curriculum
- ongoing and new curriculum design that is responsive, includes cultural diversity across subject areas, ensures equity and addresses social cultural perspectives, includes Indigenous ways of knowing
- curriculum that addresses experiential learning, employability skills development and specialty pathways such as Specialist High Skills Major and school to work transitions
be responsible for the development and distribution of relevant guidelines and resources that support review and development of equitable barrier-free design, and adaptations to accommodate needs of students with disabilities:
- make public the results of ongoing review of provincial curriculum
- develop and communicate guidelines that support school boards and staff with action plans and strategies for ongoing local curriculum reviews. These reviews require boards to communicate results of curriculum review, renewal and new curriculum plans ensuring equitable barrier free accessibility for students with disabilities
- develop in collaboration with boards and partners resource guidelines and resources to support professional practice in equitable, barrier free designed learning experiences

Assessment and accountability recommendation one

That educational and clinical school staff engage in culturally responsive (fair) assessment practices that reflect an understanding and respect for perspectives different from our own, and that students have an opportunity to engage in performance assessments in diverse learning contexts, that provides them with a critical space in which to reflect on and share their personal stories/lived experiences and their identities as learners.

Vote passed.

Motion 9.2 carried – barrier three: recommendation two

Rationale:

in the end, a true measure of equity, access, and inclusion for all in our schools is how well students from diverse backgrounds and with disabilities achieve in schools. This measure needs to include student voices in assessing how they are doing.
learners develop an understanding of themselves through ongoing opportunities for self-reflection, self-regulation, and self-monitoring supported by educator’s sensitivity to personal needs, culture, and development.
instructional resources/materials need to be reflective and responsive to student identity, culture and learning needs. This requires all those developing resources to ensure design principles of Universal Design for Learning, timely conversion ready access including multiple formats.

Curriculum and instruction recommendation two

That all learners, including students with disabilities and diverse learning needs are ensured every opportunity to fully access and participate in meaningful, challenging learning opportunities and curriculum engagement. This includes the timely access, use, and the benefits of curriculum goods and services and instructional learning materials that are fully accessible through integrated Universal Design for Learning including multiple, alternative measures for engagement, representation, expression and communication.

This requires that the ministry and boards:

ensure design of instructional materials that are fully accessible on a timely basis to students with disabilities, including for example, materials that are accessible to those with vision and hearing loss, full captioned digital, visual accommodations, and non-verbal formats
establish procurement processes and procedures that require any new instructional materials be fully accessible in timely fashion, in quality alternative formats and/or conversion ready for students with disabilities
procurement procedures regarding acquisition of approved educational resources meet the accessibility and barrier free standards, be transparent, with quality design requiring ongoing timely review, monitoring and communication
accountability for compliance regarding barrier free accessibility be the responsibility of the respective supplier or vendor
procurement processes and use of board or school developed instructional learning materials should include ongoing data gathering on students with disabilities who require accessible instructional materials, including data from students, their educators and families, that provides front-line experiences on timely access to required materials, and potential gaps requiring attention. This includes school board processes for ensuring ongoing surveys and feedback mechanisms from students and their families and educators on their experiences accessing timely instructional materials and input on what is working and required for ongoing individual student learning
establish dedicated shared resources both within and among school boards, to enable efficient and effective conversion ready materials that are in accessible format, where needed, on a timely basis. This includes ensuring a board lead for oversight and development of processes for coordination and response

Assessment and accountability recommendation two

That students be explicitly instructed in self-assessment methods so that their observations and reflections on their own learning and the experiences and suitability of accessible resources can provide valuable feedback to teachers in refining their instructional plans.

Vote passed.

Motion 9.3 carried – barrier three: recommendation three

Rationale:

there is a difference between curriculum and pedagogy. Curriculum is all about what we teach. Pedagogy is about how we teach it
when addressing curriculum, assessment, and instruction, there is an explicit relationship between them. It is impossible to design curriculum without developing a deep understanding of who the students are through assessment (getting to know them) and ensuring their identities are reflected in the curriculum design and classroom resources, in instructional methods (how do we know how they learn best) and in fair assessment practices

Curriculum and instruction recommendation three

That the Ministry of Education, school boards and schools/ colleges of education responsible for pre-service and ongoing professional learning and leadership development in each discipline and domain ensure the principles and practices of Universal Design for Learning and Differentiated Instruction are infused within curriculum, assessment, and instruction including procurement requirements and use of instructional resources, optimizing teaching and learning for all.

Assessment and accountability recommendation three

that pre-service, in-service, and on-going job-embedded professional learning on diagnostic, formative, and summative curriculum-based and more formal assessments be provided to educators to inform differentiated instruction for all learners
that school and system leaders in their respective roles ensure – designing, assessing, evaluating, reporting, and monitoring of Universal Design Learning and Differentiated Instruction in their schools as it relates to access, equity and inclusion for all learners

Vote passed.

Motion 9.4 carried – barrier three: recommendation four

Rationale:

the focus for all curriculum-based and clinical assessments should be primarily used to inform differentiated instruction for students based on their talents, strengths, and needs, and not as a means to prematurely “remove” students from accessing the provincial curriculum/and or age-appropriate regular education classroom based solely on diagnosis and identification. A developmental gap argument based on assessments, continues to be made in schools, resulting in premature narrowing of pathways (alternative curriculum replaces the Ontario curriculum rather than a balance of both where needed) creating barriers to accessing credit-bearing courses, and post-secondary education destinations. Current research (see Parekh & Brown, 2018, 19) provides evidence that racialized minority students are disproportionately segregated in special education classrooms with fewer pathways remaining open to them over the duration of their school careers. Moreover, students with disabilities from racialized cultural minorities are overrepresented in segregated special education classes and disadvantaged through streaming processes
assessment expertise by qualified individuals and sensitivity to specific learner needs and disabilities needs to inform the multi/transdisciplinary team planning and monitoring process with regard to appropriate program and placement options (for example, regular education placements, special class placements, special school placements, secondary pathways)
Inclusion and Universal Design Learning principles in program and learning design extends beyond formal classroom learning to multiple diverse experiences including outdoor and experiential learning, social and recreational activities, extra-curricular, community engagement and specialized pathways to success

Curriculum and instruction recommendation four

That the Ministry of Education, school boards and schools/colleges of education enable and ensure student voice, lived experiences, student participation and engagement in ongoing curriculum, learning and assessment experiences, ensuring opportunity to create person-directed learning and transition plans, and full equitable access to multiple, adaptable pathways.

Assessment and accountability recommendation four:

that the Ministry of Education, educational and clinical school board staff commit to policy and processes that ensure fair and equitable, barrier-free assessment of student performance and learning for students with disability with provision and responsiveness to alternative, timely, flexible format and personalized for learner needs and identities
that the Ministry of Education requires formal assessments, including provincial assessments, fully accessible, barrier free for student with disabilities providing for fair and equitable assessment practices
that the board assessment policies provide for fair and equitable, barrier free accessibility for students with disability
that ministry and board ensure fair and equitable assessment policies and practices using non-discriminatory and antiracist indicators in their development, design and application
this requires that:
- the Ministry of Education ensures all provincial assessments be accessible to and barrier-free for students with disabilities, providing a fair and accurate assessment of learning
- the boards ensure fair and equitable, barrier-free assessments for students with disabilities, through policy and processes that commit to ensuring all assessment of student performance and learning meet these provisions
- The ministry and board educator guidelines, resources and professional learning be developed and available to support the design and practice of fair, equitable, barrier free assessment, and alternative evaluation methods
- The ministry and board be required to have ongoing monitoring of fair and equitable, barrier -free assessment practice and design as part of the curriculum and assessment improvement planning
that boards ensure students have full access to learning opportunities, ongoing feedback and sufficiently diverse programming experiences in and beyond the classroom within multiple, adaptive and flexible learning environments and across differentiated pathways that are responsive to a wide range of individual and cultural learning needs
that boards ensure students have full equitable inclusion and access to multiple adaptive pathways, experiential learning and specialized programs whereby admissions, resources, the learning environment, professional learning and supports are planned, openly communicated and monitored for student need and barrier-free participation and engagement

Vote passed.

Motion 9.5 carried – barrier three: recommendation five

Rationale:

ongoing continuous interaction needs to recognize and celebrate students’ voice, personal experiences, and family voices as authentic sources of (self) knowledge reflected in co-negotiated program and personalized planning, leading to progressive curriculum, assessment, and instructional design
the learning environment needs to create spaces for shared learning where all students, including those with diverse learning needs can identify and celebrate their heritage, culture, and identity, for example, ongoing development of provincial curriculum and supports that respect individual disability needs and learning contexts
the ministries, boards and public organizations need to have ongoing strategies and procedures that are inclusive and accessible to survey, gather information and create optimal responsive and current learning opportunities for life-long learning for all

Curriculum and instruction recommendation five:

that the ministry and boards ensure two-way interactive communication with learners, partners in learning, families, educators, communities and the greater public is open, available and fully accessible in preferred formats for persons with disabilities ensuring methods for timely, flexible use, and benefit
that ongoing input, feedback and monitoring processes include open communication, regular policy design and review, and ongoing procedures and practices ensuring full access, equity and inclusion for a wide range of abilities and needs. This is required by the Ministry of Education, school boards and their partners enabling ongoing lifelong learning for students, families and the wider community

Assessment and accountability recommendation five:

that online learning environments and online resources supported by ministry and boards facilitate learning and engagement with others:
- through alternative mechanisms by which information exchange, collaboration, and learning can take place
- that these environments form an integral part of an accessible curriculum and assessment-informed instructional strategies for a wide range of abilities and needs that students have
- that the design of these learning spaces be as flexible as possible to accommodate those needs and preferences

Vote passed.

Motion 9.6 carried – barrier three: recommendation six

Rationale:

there is a gap in knowing what accessible, equitable, and inclusive curriculum, assessment, and instructional resources have been developed within school boards, but may not yet been shared widely including in multiple, accessible formats. The question that educators need to ask is “Am I designing curriculum to be as accessible as possible with the resources I have or are out there but not yet accessible to me?”
a resource list is appended with an early sampling of potential references
inter-agency, inter-ministry transparency, and seamless coordinated points of access and policy alignments, enable families, students, and educators access to early and on-going shared supports and ensures a school has preparedness and readiness for students of varying diverse learning needs
ongoing development of universally designed, open source resources, fully accessible and/or conversion-ready shared across boards and agencies, for students, families, board, ministry training, enables greater effective resource use, awareness and capacity building across sectors

Curriculum and instruction recommendation six

That a dedicated accessibility hub of continuously updated centrally located (for example, online) resources and research-based initiatives, opportunities, awareness and ethical practices in equity, accessibility and inclusion be developed, made available, openly accessible and mobilized across education sectors ensuring learners of all abilities are supported. That the provincial government be responsible for enabling infrastructure for accessibility hub frameworks across ministries, education sectors, and the public domain and that boards ensure students, families, educators and stakeholders have access to the resources.

Assessment and accountability recommendation six

That research-informed culturally responsive pedagogy and assessment-informed practices be widely shared throughout district school boards through professional learning networks and online knowledge repositories, so that all students can access an equitable, inclusive, and strengths-based education in classrooms, and through experiential learning experiences that enable civic and community engagement.

Vote passed.

Motion 9.7 carried – barrier three: recommendation seven

Rationale:

Students and staff are being taught about human rights and accessible education in a variety of ways, often as a response to particular issues related to local and global contexts of exclusion and marginalization. A more systemic and integrated approach to embedding Ontario Human Rights Code and Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act throughout the curriculum, learning expectations, and core competencies for students and staff should advance accessible, inclusive and equitable educational practices for all. Access to shared curriculum resources that address lived experiences of those with disability, and resources and expertise (for example, inter-ministry, community developed resources, association sources, working documents), helps to create and sustain accessibility, inclusion building, awareness, knowledge, skills, and dispositions.

Curriculum and instruction recommendation seven

That the ministry and boards ensure curriculum on equity, accessibility and inclusion including teaching and learning of lived experiences of persons with disabilities, accessible education, Ontario Human Rights Code and Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act requirements, be reviewed, developed, integrated, and implemented within the provincial curriculum, and its core skills and learning expectations.

Assessment and accountability recommendation seven

That ministry and board assessment policies and practices address equity, access, and inclusion ensuring the lived experiences of persons with disabilities informs fair, equitable assessment practices connected to the provincial curriculum, core skills, and learning expectations for students and staff.

Vote passed.

Motion 9.8 carried – barrier three: recommendation eight

New and specialized programs – rationale:

curriculum is continually being reformed and renewed, responsive to global and local contexts, learning needs and competencies. Education and skill development require accessibility-related design and content, including electronic-accessibility in curricular experiences. New and emerging programs need to be accessible and barrier free for inclusion and engagement of students with disabilities

Curriculum and instruction recommendation eight (a)

That the ministry and boards require current and newly developed special programs, including French language programs, be open, fully accessible and barrier free for students with disabilities and that the programs be reviewed, monitored and developed utilizing open, transparent processes that provide for timely communication, accessible accommodations and participation by students with disabilities.

This requires that:

the ministry set required direction and board required strategies and processes that ensure specialized programs, including French language programs, are accessible to and effectively accommodate students with disabilities. This requires provision for effective accommodations, accessible locations, instructional materials and program design that is accessible, and barrier free for the needs of students with disabilities
the boards develop, implement and monitor a strategy and corresponding action plan to ensure specialized programs, including French language, are open and accessible and barrier free. This includes regular program reviews and evaluation, and public consultation and communications. For example, the strategy includes data on participation, admission process, accessible environments, curriculum and instruction inclusive design, and ongoing action plans to respond to accessibility, inclusion and responsiveness to student need

Physical health and wellness, mental health and well-being – rationale

Physical health and wellness – regular participation in physical activity develops body composition, skeletal health, and contributes to the prevention or delay of chronic disease. It also improves several aspects of psychological health including self-esteem and promotes social contacts and friendships. It is also an important determinant of health that is associated with a range of physiological benefits in children, including reduced cardiometabolic risk and more preferable body size (Boddy et al., 2014). Physical activity in childhood is also positively associated with mental health (Ahn & Fedewa, 2011) and academic achievement (Fedewa & Ahn, 2011), and it is therefore important that children and young people accrue sufficient physical activity:

among people with physical disabilities, participation in sport, exercise, and other forms of leisure time physical activity has been shown to yield numerous health benefits (Carroll et al., 2014). Nevertheless, the vast majority of people living with a physical disability do not participate in sufficient physical activity to achieve health benefits (Carroll et al., 2014). Many children and youth who have intellectual and developmental disabilities do not exercise sufficiently, play sports, or have access to recreational activities (Foley & McCubbin, 2009; Howie et al., 2012; Pitetti et al., 2009; Rimmer & Rowland, 2008; Whitt-Glover et al., 2006)
mental health and well-being – research has called for a push toward school-based mental health resources such that schools and teachers play a significant role in shaping healthy child and youth development (CYAC, 2010). There has been shown a convincing link between mental health problems and difficulties with academic engagement, school achievement, absenteeism, retention/dropout, and social relationships (Tolan & Dodge, 2005; Owens et al., 2012; Bradley & Greene, 2013)

Curriculum and instruction recommendation eight (b)

That the ministry develops a health and well-being strategy and action plan that ensures current research and evidence-based practice in physical, cognitive, mental, social and emotional learning and development of all learners, including those with disabilities. This requires human and material supports and resources that are developed, coordinated and, financially supported. The ongoing health and well-being of students including those with disabilities requires safe, caring, accepting and inclusive environments, and skill development in social emotional learning such as in healthy relationships, empathy, self-regulation and conflict resolution.

This requires that:

the ministry makes available to boards coordinated resources, guidelines and materials that effectively include students across all disabilities in physical, health and wellness programming within and beyond the school environment (for example, physical education, health education, sports, co-curricular activities). That the resources include disability related sexual health education programming, incorporating training for educators, and awareness and lived experiences of those with disabilities as part of the overall learning opportunities and content within the inclusive design and education training
the boards incorporate in its physical, health and wellbeing program design and experiences activities that enable students across all disabilities to be included, to participate and engage in healthy physical activity. This includes accessibility for all students through individual engagement in physical activity, co-curricular and participation through necessary communications such as captioning, interpreting and virtual means
the ministry, school boards and associated partners collaborate in ongoing review, development and ready access to social, emotional learning resources, approaches and programming that are inclusive for students across all disabilities
the ministry and boards provide Adapted Physical Education by developing, implementing and monitoring carefully designed physical education programs for students across all disabilities, based on comprehensive assessments, so that students with disabilities develop skills and competencies to enable healthy personal living
the ministry and boards expand the curriculum specifically about mental health to provide balance and connection with physical health and well-being for students with disabilities to support the whole-child/whole school approach to student achievement and well-being

This requires that the renewed curriculum and improvement planning address and implement strategies outlined in the Mental Health Assist Ontario initiative for schools including:

providing resources, training, and implementation support for evidence-based social-emotional learning that fits within Ontario classrooms
engaging young people, parents/families and adult allies to develop and share resources for building student mental health literacy at school, home, and in the community
providing resources, training and implementation support to assist school and system leaders, and school staff, to create and sustain mentally healthy schools and classroom
providing role-specific resources, training and implementation support to enhance knowledge, confidence, consistency and quality in responding to mild-moderate student mental health and addiction needs at school
providing role-specific resources, training and implementation support to respond to serious student mental health and addiction needs in collaboration with system partners

Indigenous education – rationale

The needs of the whole student are the base considerations in Indigenous descriptions of education, and the guiding principle in Indigenous conceptions of student achievement. What matters to Indigenous peoples is that each member of the community is nurtured and challenged in respectful ways. This form of teaching/ learning is done through the honoring of the culture, the teachings, the languages, and the gifts of each Nation (Hinton, 2011; Zitzer-Comfort, 2008).

Curriculum and instruction recommendation eight (c)

The Ministry of Education Indigenous education strategy is designed to improve opportunities for First Nation Métis and Inuit students, including students with disabilities, and to increase knowledge and awareness of all students about indigenous histories, cultures, teachings, languages and perspectives.

The strategy requires that:

the ministry ensures curriculum design and content including Indigenous curriculum is fully accessible and available for students with disabilities
the boards ensure that Indigenous pedagogy, ways of knowing, and Indigenous student experiences including students across all disabilities are guided by cultural knowledge and perspectives that provide and enable supportive personalized assessment, culturally responsive knowledge building and personalized learning pathways to success
the ministry and boards address how student achievement and wellbeing for Indigenous students living with disabilities be reconceptualized to include students’ emotional, intellectual and spiritual aspects of the whole being. This process must be supported through the examination of respectful conditions and experiences that fully consider the impacts of the classroom, the school, the community and the globe. The focus of curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices must address the ways in which education can be reconceptualized to include Indigenous ways of knowing

Specialized alternative and expanded curriculum – rationale:

curriculum development and learning expectations that support the learning needs of students with disabilities need to be accessible and responsive to specific individual needs. This includes extensions to curriculum and alternative curriculum resources and learning expectations
there are limited provincially regulated resources for some disabilities, for example, low incidence disabilities such as vision loss. For example, references such as Expanded Core Curriculum are supported and resourced by some learning institutes. While individual boards provide a variety of differing supports, in specialized, learning centers and regular class there needs to be enhanced development, shared access, and staff development in these areas of expanded and alternative curriculum across the province. Additionally, students who participate in specialized and expanded programs require fair and impartial assessment practices. Instructional designs need to be inclusive and accommodate the needs of students with disabilities ensuring they have every opportunity to meet diploma and specialize certification requirements (for example, apprenticeship programs, Specialist High Skills Major)

Curriculum & instruction recommendation eight (d)

That the Ministry of Education review, develop and provide alternative and expanded curriculum and learning expectations that support the specific learning needs of students with disabilities in their access and use of learning resources specific and responsive to their needs:

this includes the requirement of specific curriculum, and /or recommended resources for students with disabilities, that address or are tailored to the needs arising from the student’s disability or combination of disabilities
that for students with vision loss, resources including the Expanded Core Curriculum be adopted for required use across each board
that the ministry upon consultation, review and development of any new provincial curriculum and supporting supplementary resource documents require authentic relevant inclusion of specialized expanded or additional renewed curriculum that address the needs arising from specific disability or combination of disabilities
that for students with developmental disabilities, an inclusive and expanded curriculum be developed and that supplementary resources developed by boards and collaborative partners be readily accessible and shared
that the ministry in partnership with boards review and develop processes and documentation related to specialized and expanded programs and certificates leading to graduation to ensure required and supported transitions to student’s post-secondary programming, school to workplace and community opportunities are in place
that boards ensure alternative, expanded curriculum and learning expectations be supported by educators (classroom and special education teachers) and other professionals who interact with the student, and that adequate time and resources be given for professional learning, planning and delivery of these curriculum

Assessment and accountability recommendation eight (d)

That boards ensure students with disabilities who participate in specialized and expanded programs receive the required adaptations to instructional design and assessment practices so that they have every opportunity afforded them to earn a diploma albeit 16 credits for an Ontario Secondary School Certificate or 30 credits for the Ontario Secondary School Diploma. It is in the design process where many students for example, with intellectual disabilities can achieve credits and pursue diploma pathways (for example, through apprenticeship programs and others).

Vote passed

Motion 9.9 carried – barrier three: recommendation nine

Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment process, strategies, practices and improvement planning – rationale:

research evidence-based processes, strategies, and practices in curriculum, assessment and instructional design, review, and use continue to inform and transform education, learning experiences and response to student needs. Barrier free accessibility for learners with disabilities requires ongoing evidence informed, shared resources to respond to new technologies, contexts, situations and issues. This work is person centered, involves ongoing learning and change at individual, system and institutional levels. Boards as champions for all their students have a duty to accommodate students with disabilities through continuous review of practice and process, collaboration, and shared solutions involving transdisciplinary practice

Curriculum and instruction recommendation nine

That the ministry in collaboration with boards develop, make accessible and continue to renew resource tools to support full curriculum and assessment accessibility for students with disability including:

resource tools on the process and content of curriculum design and review to eliminate and prevent accessibility barriers
resource tools and process resources for the development, appropriate design and use of assessment tools and practices that are fair, equitable, fully accessible and barrier free
resource tools and process resources to support educators in the design and development of Universal Design for Learning instructional strategies
resources tools and process resources to support full inclusion of all leaners, whereby barriers that prevent students with disability from full and complete participation in curriculum are addressed (for example, participation in experiential learning, physical and health education, outdoor learning, co-curricular learning)
resource tools and processes to survey, review, develop, monitor and communicate curriculum, assessment and instruction practices and student engagement data to provide ongoing accountability on barrier free accessibility for students with disability

Assessment and accountability recommendation nine

That through ongoing multi-year improvement processes, transdisciplinary practice, resource sharing and flexible shared solutions to eliminate and prevent barriers. Boards provide equitable learning opportunities, responsive to student need.

Vote passed

Motion 9.10 carried – barrier three: recommendation ten

Rationale – long term objectives and timelines alignment for Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment recommendations

The ministry, boards and public organizations need to have procedures and processes in place to meet the long-term objectives of the accessibility standards. This includes the plan for barrier prevention and reduction, systems of gathering information and developing ongoing reporting on the implementation of accessibility standards, recognizing that implementation of all recommendations is ongoing, continuous and responsive to needs of students with disabilities. Guidelines and tools to support process orientation, ongoing development and impact towards standards and continuous improvement enable implementation and goals of equity, accessibility and inclusion.

Assessment and accountability recommendation ten

That by 2025 the Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment recommendations will be implemented and will include:

The establishment by ministry and boards of an annual review process, whereby year over year selected recommendations are monitored using tools for assessing, evaluating and reporting on progress and ongoing status of overall accessibility standard implementation. The progress monitoring tools would include Ministry, board, association, and other relevant research resources. For example, multi year strategic plans, school effectiveness framework, equity and cultural responsiveness frameworks and the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act frameworks and tools to audit and report progress and future next steps
That the ministry develop and communicate access to guidelines to support the annual process for recommendation implementation including a variety of tools that can be utilized for auditing, surveying, feedback and next steps
That the boards collaborate with the ministry and their respective communities in their planning, processes, progress and communications toward the intended outcomes
Boards as champions for all students need to demonstrate continuous updating, collaboration and improvement in their duty to accommodate and eliminate barriers for students with disabilities as demonstrated in their annual review and public reporting

Vote passed

M 9.4 small group five presentation and discussion: organizational barriers

Small group five presented their updated recommendations to address organizational barriers for a committee vote.

Motion 9.11 carried – barrier five: recommendation one

Process for a school board identifying and making the placement of student with disabilities

The Identification, Placement and Review Committee process and regulation should be reviewed to determine if it needs to be re-designed, retained or replaced.

Vote passed

Motion 9.12 carried – barrier five: recommendation two

Parent and student participation – ensure parents and guardians of students with disabilities can easily find out and, where necessary visit, different placement, program, service and support options for a student with a disability, to ensure that the parent, guardian or the student, is knowledgeable about the options for placement, program or services that are available to be provided to that student.

Vote passed

Motion 9.13 carried – barrier five: recommendation three

Parent and student participation:

develop, implement, and make public an action plan to ensure parent/guardian/students have access to the information they need and meet the requirements of this section. The action plan should incorporate the following:
- the goal of the plan
- what information will be made available to parent/guardian/students with disabilities
- how information will be formatted to make it easy to understand and jargon free
- the types of formats that will be used to make the information available and accessible
- where information will be available to parents/guardians/students (in schools and on-line including school and school board websites)
- the timelines for distributing information to all parent/guardians/students and the key transition points when information will be provided (such as at start of school, at least once annually, and as part of student planning, including Individual Education Plan development and review)
- who will be responsible for ensuring information is provided to parent/guardian/students with disabilities
- how the distribution of information will be tracked or measured
- what measures will be used to evaluate the value and impact of providing the information
- how the action plan will be evaluated
- how the action plan will be shared publicly with regular progress updates

Vote passed

Motion 9.14 carried – barrier five: recommendation four

Parent and student participation – ensure that each school shall send home an introductory pamphlet, or equivalent, to all parent/guardians at the start of each school year, or when first registering a student in the board, and not only to families of those students who are already being identified as having a disability.

Vote passed

M 9.5 small group seven Physical and Architectural barriers presentation and discussion

The small group provided an update on their recommendations and reminded members the recommendations will be going out for electronic vote following the virtual meetings.

M 9.6 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks for the meeting and asked members to provide any key messages for the morning meeting.

Meeting 2 information

Date: August 11, 2020 from 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

Location: virtual

Present: meeting 2

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Jack Stadnyk, Jane Ste. Marie, Angelo Tocco, and Lindy Zaretsky

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Mary Bartolomucci, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Arminda Aliu and Annlouise Fitzpatrick

Ministry of Education staff: Charmaine Perera, Bobbi Clifton and David Moore

Captionist: Kim Johnson

Interpreters: Gloria Brifoglio and Sean Power

Regrets: Rita-Marie Hadley, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith and Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education (non-voting member)

Meeting 2 minutes

M 9.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks and thanked all members for their participation both meetings.

M 9.2 update from the planning for emergencies and safety small group

Committee member Donna Edwards provided an update on the work of the planning for emergencies & safety small group. The small group continues to meet to work on the second part of their mandate to develop an education planning for emergencies framework focused on students with disabilities.

M 9.3 small group five presentation and discussion: Organizational barriers

Small group five presented their updated recommendations to address organizational barriers for Committee review and feedback. The small group will incorporate member feedback and send it out for an electronic vote.

M 9.4 small group six presentation and discussion: Social realm barriers

Small group six presented their updated recommendations to address social realm barriers for Committee vote. The Committee members who voted no on the service animals’ recommendation will work with the small group lead to revise the recommendation for a future vote.

Motion 9.15 carried – barrier six: recommendation one

Transportation rationale – up to three organizations may be involved in the transportation of students: a school board, a consortium of school boards that jointly arrange for student transportation, and private bus companies that are contracted to provide bussing in that area. Students with disabilities and their parents should not have to try to figure out who is responsible for their child’s transportation needs. The following should be required of all three organizations.

To ensure that students with disabilities get the transportation services they need to attend school this recommendation will set criteria for creating monitoring and accountability. The education accessibility standard should require that where a school board provides bussing or other transportation services to students with disabilities in order to enable them to attend school, the school board/bus company’s/transportation consortia shall review and develop policies and procedures that include:

individual consultation with each family to identify accessibility and accommodation needs of the student with disabilities in relation to transportation
ensure the transportation consortia/bus companies and drivers have been properly trained to accommodate students with disabilities and their individual needs
with any bus driver that is changed, they are given the same information and training prior to driving the student, or, in the case of an emergency replacement, as soon as possible
clearly reflect the responsibilities and duties of the school board/bus companies/transportation consortia and acknowledge that they have the shared responsibility to make sure the duties are fulfilled
retention of training records, including when it was provided and report to their respective boards on training twice per year
designate and provide a reachable official at the school board and the transportation, especially during the working hours when students are being transported, to receive and address phone calls, emails and text messages from a family about problems regarding the student's transportation
documentation of all complaints reported on student transportation services, and the company to which it applies. A summary report including number of complaints, types of complaints and status, be provided to the school board, transportation consortia, Special Education Advisory Committees, and accessibility committee on a quarterly basis. These reports shall be made public on the school board’s and transportation consortium’s website
the Education Accessibility Standard should make it clear that the fact that the policies and procedures created does not remove or reduce the school board/bus companies/transportation consortia’s duties under this accessibility standard or otherwise under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, the Ontario Human Rights Code or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to ensure that the student has been provided with barrier-free participation in the school board's educational programs and opportunities. In any contract for bussing, the school boards/bus company’s/transportation consortia should be required to monitor compliance with all obligations regarding bussing, such as the duty to properly train each bus driver on the specific disability-related needs of each passenger, and to document this training. School boards/bus company’s/transportation consortia should periodically audit consumer satisfaction and compliance with all applicable education accessibility standards and publicly report on the audit’s results. A bus company’s failure to consistently and reliably meet its obligations should trigger penalties and termination of the contract
a valuation process for past performance and provision of transportation services for students with disabilities should be included in the Request for Proposal for bussing. A valuation of any company’s past performance on accessibility for students with disabilities should be given a major consideration in deciding the continued use of service

Vote passed

Motion 9.16 carried – barrier six: recommendation one

Service animals (as per the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, customer service)

Barrier – some school boards or schools do not let students with disabilities bring a trained service animal to school as an accommodation to their disability, either because the school board or school does not allow for this or lacks a proper policy.

In Ontario, some students on the autism spectrum and their families have reported having difficulties at some school boards with being allowed to bring a service animal to school and have even had to take action before the Human Rights Tribunal against a school board. Others have been able to succeed without barriers in bringing their service animal to school.

Each school board should:

ensure that students with disabilities are able to bring a trained service animal to school and venues that hold school events as a disability accommodation. In the event students and/or personnel at the school who have a reaction to the animal that constitutes a disability, the school board has a duty to accommodate them, while ensuring there is no barrier to accommodating the student who requires trained service animal. Each school board should respect each student’s and personnels rights under the Ontario Human Rights Code and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
set specific requirements for school board practices in relation to a student bringing a service animal to school and any school events. The recent Ministry of Education policy directive to school boards on this topic did not include the important specifics that are needed
ensure that there should be no bureaucratic or policy barriers to students with disabilities bringing a sufficiently trained service animal to school and any school events
immediately notify the student and their family of any and all concerns if the school board does not accept at first the sincerity or legitimacy of the student's request, or the training of the service animal. The school board should investigate the request, including how the student's benefits from the service animal outside the school and in the home, or any other concerns, as well as the experience of other schools or school boards that have allowed students with disabilities to bring service animals to school and any school events, before acting on any potential board reluctance or unwillingness to grant the student's request. If a school board is not prepared to accept a request to be able to bring a service animal to school at first, the school board should undertake a test period of allowing the service animal at school, unless the school board can demonstrate that it would be impossible to conduct such a test period without causing the school board undue hardship. A school board should not refuse a request to bring a service animal to school based on no test period and based on speculative assumptions or stereotypes
approach such requests should not depend on whether the student is doing adequately at school without the service animal. The question should be whether the student could do better at reaching their potential at school if assisted by their service animal. Similarly, the question is not whether the service animal will assist the student in accessing the curriculum. Rather the relevant question is whether the service animal could assist the student with any aspect of student life in the school environment, such as social interaction, independence and self-regulation
should not refuse accommodations for a student with a disability to have a service animal in class because of some other students or staff without a disability objecting to have a service animal in class. Such concerns of other students, or of staff should be addressed by making arrangements that allow the student with a disability to bring their service animal to school, while situating any objecting student or staff with no disability at an acceptable distance from them. Notwithstanding anything in such school board policies, nothing may restrict a person with vision loss, student, staff, parent or otherwise, from bringing a qualified guide dog with whom they have trained to school
ensure that principals, teachers, school office staff and families of students with disabilities know about this policy and that no attitudinal barriers impede this accommodation
communicate and post signage that service animals are welcome at the school

Vote did not pass.

M 9.5 small group one presentation and discussion: attitudes, behaviours, perceptions and assumptions

The Committee had a thoughtful discussion on whether to keep the wording “full inclusion” in the small group one recommendation. Members will follow-up and provide suggested wording to the small group members after the meeting to prepare for a future vote.

M 9.6 update from the timelines and accountability small group

Committee member Stephen Andrews provided an update on the timelines and accountability small group work. The small group is drafting a report which includes consistent timelines for the Committee’s recommendations and an implementation framework to ensure recommendation outcomes are achieved. This report will be sent to the Committee for review and input once completed.

M 9.7 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks thanked the members for their participation in both virtual meetings. The Chair asked small groups to review and update their recommendations based on Committee feedback to prepare for electronic votes and to provide their key messages electronically. The next K-12 Education Standards Development Committee virtual meetings will take place on October 6, 2020.

K-12 education meeting 8: Tuesday August 11, 2020

Letter from chair to the minister

Date: September 23, 2020

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
777 Bay Street, 5^th Floor
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister,

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the virtual meetings (“Meeting 8”) held on Tuesday August 11, 2020 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

The Committee heard a presentation from staff at the Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility. Ministry staff provided an overview of the electronic voting process to ensure all members are comfortable with the procedures for voting online.

At the meeting, the Committee discussed the revised recommendations addressing barrier area one: Attitudes, Behaviors, Perceptions and Assumptions. The Committee had a successful discussion and passed five initial draft recommendations to address barrier area one. The Committee also reviewed recommendations addressing barrier area six: Social Realms. As a result of our discussions, the Committee passed 11 draft initial recommendations to address barrier area six.

Looking ahead to the Committee’s next virtual meeting, the Committee will be reviewing revised small group recommendations with the aim to finalize for voting.

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s ongoing progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting 1 information

Date: August 11, 2020 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

Location: virtual meeting

Format of committee minutes and references: For the purposes of referencing Committee documents and items in the minutes: ‘M’ (Meeting) represents the meeting number/minute items/sections/action items and ‘Partial’ represents limited attendance. Motion represents a vote that has occurred. All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report submitted to the Minister.

Meeting 1 present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Non-voting Standards Development Committee members: Claudine Munroe (Ministry of Education)

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Susan Picarello, Mary Bartolomucci, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Joanna Patsakos and Stephanie Van Laeken.

Ministry of Education staff: Charmaine Perera, Bobbi Clifton and David Moore

Captionist: Kim Johnson

Interpreters: Gloria Brifoglio and Sean Power

Regrets: Jane Ste. Marie

Meeting 1 minutes

M 8.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks to the Committee, and provided an outline of the key deliverables for the meeting. The Chair provided an overview of the timelines for the Committee work and the potential to have more meetings in the fall. The Chair noted the value in the diversity of member perspectives on the Committee and appreciates the consistent commitment of all the members.

M 8.2 housekeeping and logistical information

Ministry staff provided virtual meeting logistics and updates on per diems for Committee members.

M 8.3 ministry presentation: review of the electronic voting process

Ministry staff provided a presentation on the process for electronic voting for the Committee. The presentation followed with member questions and discussion. As a result, an electronic voting process was agreed upon by members in accordance with the Terms of Reference.

M 8.4 small group one presentation and discussion: attitudes, behaviors, perceptions and assumptions

Small group one presented their revised recommendations to address barriers related to Attitudes, Behaviours, Perceptions and Assumptions. The Committee will continue their discussion on whether to include the recommendation language “full inclusion” in their small group one recommendation.

Motion 8.1 carried – barrier one: recommendation one

Preamble: People with disabilities (students, educators, employees, etc.) should be directly involved in designing and reviewing policies, programs, curriculum, as well as participating in speaking opportunities to students and educators at the school level, school board level, and ministry level, in K-12 Education and whereas the Ministry of Education should play a role in ensuring that students and professionals with disabilities are involved with provincial and system planning.

Recommendation:

each school board set up and maintain a network of teachers and other staff with disabilities, and a network of students with disabilities, to get input on accessibility issues at the school board and to get advice on barriers
the Ministry of Education provide open and accessible opportunities for these student and school staff networks to share information and ideas.

Timeline: Completed within two years of the government accepting recommendations.

Vote passed.

Motion 8.2 carried – barrier one: recommendation two

Preamble: Specific strategies need to be taught so that teacher candidates and future teachers are instructed to ensure inclusive, accessible, equitable education and that there be consistency in the delivery of all special education additional qualifications.

Recommendation:

the Ontario College of Teachers and the Ministry of Education require that, to graduate with a degree in education and to qualify to teach in an Ontario school, teachers receive specific curriculum and training, as part of their university program in education, on the need for our education system to be fully inclusive and accessible for students with disabilities, and on how to teach curriculum to all students on this topic
the Ontario College of Teachers review the initial teacher education program to enhance the quality and content of the Special Education Core Content, by revising the Accreditation Resource Guide and monitor the delivery of all Special Education Additional Qualifications courses, so they are delivered as accredited, reflecting the current Additional Qualification guidelines

Timeline: Completed within two years of the government accepting recommendations.

Vote passed.

Motion 8.3 carried – barrier one: recommendation three

Preamble: All education staff need to be in-serviced in the philosophy of equity, accessibility and the full inclusion of and full participation by students with disabilities, so they are equipped to model inclusive behaviours and attitudes, and to ensure that differences are accepted as a part of life.

Recommendation:

each school board provide specific training to all school board staff who deal with parents or students, on the importance of the full inclusion of and full participation by students with disabilities, and on effective strategies for teaching and designing lesson plans in this area
the Ministry of Education develop and make available to school boards and the public, sample or model programs for training school board staff on teaching in this area

Timeline: Completed within two years of the government accepting recommendations.

Vote passed.

Motion 8.4 carried – barrier one: recommendation four

Preamble: School boards must instill accessibility planning into their vision and daily operations to eliminate attitudinal barriers among students, school board employees and families, and whereas they must clearly communicate this accessibility commitment to all families of their students. The Committee recommends that the Ministry of Education create sample or model curriculum and teaching resources that a school board can opt to use to deliver this curriculum. An example of teaching resources are classroom videos.

Motion 8.5 carried – barrier one: recommendation four

Each school board develops, implements and periodically evaluates a multi-year age-appropriate program/curriculum to teach all students, school board staff and families of school board students, about the full inclusion of and full participation of students with disabilities. This program shall include communication posted in all schools and sent to all families of the school board's students, on the school board's commitment to the full inclusion of students with disabilities, and the benefits this brings to all students. Where possible:

exercises having students, staff and, where interested, parents/guardians conduct a barrier assessment such as a “barrier scavenger hunt”, to catalogue disability barriers and invent suggestions on how these can be removed or prevented hearing from, meeting and interacting with people with disabilities. For example, assemblies and/or via guest presentations.
online posting of resources on these activities to enable sharing with other school boards

Timeline: Completed within two years of the government accepting recommendations.

Motion 8.6 carried – barrier one: recommendation five

Preamble: Supports are needed to change attitudes and behaviours including policy frameworks, resources, opportunities and performance expectations.,

Recommendation: Each school board develop and implement human resources policies targeted at full accessibility and the full inclusion of and full participation by students with disabilities, including:

making knowledge and experience on implementing the full inclusion of and full participation by students with disabilities an important hiring and promotions criterion especially for principals, vice-principals and teaching staff
emphasizing accessibility and the full inclusion of and full participation by students with disabilities knowledge and performance in any performance management and performance reviews

Timeline: Completed within two years of the government accepting recommendations.

Vote passed.

M 8.5 small group 6 presentation and discussion: social realms

Small group six presented their updated recommendations to address barriers related to Social Realms.

Motion 8.7 carried – barrier six: recommendation one – educational and online events

Each school board should only hold educational events at venues on school board property or outside school board property whose built environment is accessible to students and staff with disabilities. The buses used to transport students to the off-site events should also be accessible, so that students with disabilities do not have to travel to the event separate from their classmates. Educational events include, but are not limited to clubs, teams, field trips, dances, graduation, fundraisers, extracurricular groups or any school or school board event that includes students and school personnel.

Note: To assign specific staff at school board to facilitate transportation for students with disabilities. Please refer to built environment definition in the glossary.

Vote passed.

Motion 8.8 carried – barrier six: recommendation two – transitions facilitator/navigator

Each school board should develop and create the role of the Transition Facilitator/Navigator to work with students and their families in collaboration with school staff, and community agencies to explore pathways and develop transition plans. The Transition Facilitator/Navigator would assist students accessing special education supports, consult and liaison with community disability service providers and provide transition planning resource development for all school board and school staff.

Vote passed.

Motion 8.9 Carried – barrier six: recommendation three – transitions facilitator/navigator

Ministry of Education should set up a centralized Transitions Hub. The Hub would support the role of the Transitions Facilitator / Navigator as well as provide a conduit of best practice transitions information and regular communication from across all publicly funded school boards and school authorities in Ontario. If needed it would provide smaller boards the ability to partner and develop successful programs.

Vote passed.

Motion 8.10 carried – barrier six: recommendation four – transportation

The obligations under this part of the standard should be binding, both on school boards and transportation consortia. Both parties have the duty to adhere to the standard and to work together to ensure that the rights of students with disabilities are honored.

Vote passed.

M 8.6 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair adjusted the meeting agenda for the afternoon to account for the time spent on voting and reminded members to submit their key messages over email. The Chair adjourned the meeting until reconvening for the afternoon meeting.

Meeting 2 information

Date: August 11, 2020 from 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

Location: virtual

Meeting 2 present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Non-voting Standards Development Committee members: Claudine Munroe (Ministry of Education)

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Susan Picarello, Mary Bartolomucci, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Joanna Patsakos and Stephanie Van Laeken.

Ministry of Education staff: Charmaine Perera, Bobbi Clifton and David Moore

Captionist: Kim Johnson

Interpreters: Gloria Brifoglio and Sean Power

Regrets:Victoria Noland and Jane Ste. Marie

Meeting 2 minutes

M 8.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks and advised members of the revised meeting goals for the afternoon.

M 8.2 continuation of small group six presentation and discussion: social realms

Small group six continued their presentation on the updated recommendations to address barriers related to Social Realms. As a result of the Committee’s discussion, the Committee will refer some recommendations for electronic vote.

Motion 8.11 carried – barrier six: recommendation five

The Education Accessibility Standard should require that where a school board provides bussing or other transportation to students with disabilities in order to enable them to attend school, the school board shall ensure, and shall monitor to ensure that the school board has individually consulted with each family to identify the accessibility and accommodation needs of the student with disabilities in relation to transportation, and the bus company and driver have been properly trained to accommodate that need.

Vote passed.

Motion 8.12 carried – barrier six: recommendation six

The Education Accessibility Standard should require that the school board and, where applicable, a bus company with which it contracts, will ensure that pick-up and drop-off locations for a student's bussing are accessible when needed to accommodate the parents or guardians of students with disabilities.

Vote passed.

Motion 8.13 carried – barrier six: recommendation seven – bullying/cyberbullying workshops

As a part of efforts to educate the entire school community about inclusion of students and school community members with disabilities, all school boards will develop and implement workshops to educate on and address bullying and cyberbullying in schools and the impacts that they can have on students’ physical and mental health. These workshops need to be informed and facilitated by young people with disabilities. The workshops are to be presented to all members of the school community.

Vote passed.

Motion 8.14 carried – barrier six: recommendation eight – experiential / co-op learning opportunities

People with disabilities face extraordinarily high unemployment rates. Getting the chance for an experiential learning or co-op placement while in school can be the gateway, if not the only gateway, to that first letter of reference. Every students’ first letter of reference is essential to getting their first job and is even more important if you have a disability. Therefore, these recommendations are essential to combating the high unemployment that youth with disabilities too often happen to face. For the success of these recommendations, it is extremely important that school boards provide informal advice and support to all employers, including small businesses.

To ensure that students with disabilities can fully participate in a school board's experiential learning programs, each school board should:

review its experiential learning programs to identify and remove any accessibility barriers
put in place a process to affirmatively reach out to potential placement organizations in order to ensure that there will be a range of accessible placement opportunities in which students with disabilities can participate
ensure that its partner organizations that accept its students for experiential learning placements are effectively informed of their duty to accommodate the learning needs of students with disabilities
create and share supports and advice for placement organizations who need assistance to ensure that students with disabilities can fully participate in their experiential learning placements
monitor placement organizations to ensure they have someone in place to ensure that students with disabilities are effectively accommodated, and to ensure that effective accommodation was provided during each placement of a student with a disability who needed accommodation
survey students with disabilities and experiential learning placement organizations at the end of any experiential learning placements to see if their disability-related needs were effectively accommodated

Vote passed.

Motion 8.15 carried – barrier six: recommendation nine

The Ministry of Education should provide templates or models for these policies and measures. It should be required to prepare and make available training videos for school boards and employers offering experiential learning programs to guide them on accommodating students with disabilities and the impacts in experiential learning placements.

Vote passed.

Motion 8.16 carried – barrier Six: recommendation ten – social isolation

Each school board shall provide where needed or requested by a student with disabilities or their family, staff assistance for social interaction and play, particularly during unstructured or minimally supervised times, such as recess or lunch. This is to address social isolation that students may encounter throughout their educational journey from K-12. The Individual Education Plan shall include a detailed, specific plan for how to implement and achieve social inclusion both in the formal school activities and informal parts of the school day. Creative and flexible plans should could include multiple organizations or programs both inside and outside school board designed to foster inclusiveness in the long term across all levels from students to the administration. This recommendation is inclusive of all students with disabilities even those who require a communication device or use augmentative communication to communicate.

Vote passed.

Motion 8.17 carried – barrier six: recommendation eleven – service animals

Barrier six is that some school boards or schools do not let students with disabilities bring a sufficiently trained service animal to school as an accommodation to their disability, either because the school board or school does not allow for this or lacks a proper policy to allow for this. Some students on the autism spectrum and their families in Ontario have reported having difficulties at some school boards with being allowed to bring a service animal to school and have even had to take action before the Human Rights Tribunal against a school board. Others have been able to succeed without barriers in bringing their service animal to school.

Each school board should:

ensure that students with disabilities are able to bring a trained service animal to school and venues that hold school events as a disability accommodation. In the event students at the school who have a reaction to the animal that constitutes a disability, the school board has a duty to accommodate them, to keep a distance, while ensuring there is no barrier to accommodating the student who require the trained service animal. Each school board should respect the student's rights under the Ontario Human Rights Code and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
set specific requirements for school board practices in relation to a student bringing a service animal to school and any school events. The recent Ministry of Education policy directive to school boards on this topic did not include the important specifics that are needed.
ensure that there should be no bureaucratic or policy barriers to students with disabilities bringing a sufficiently trained service animal to school and any school events.
immediately notify the student and their family of any and all concerns if the school board does not accept at first the sincerity or legitimacy of the student's request, or the training of the service animal. The school board should investigate the request, including the student's benefits from the service animal outside school and in the home, or any other concerns, as well as the experience of other schools or school boards that have allowed students with disabilities to bring service animals to school and any school events, before acting on any potential board reluctance or unwillingness to grant the student's request. If a school board is not prepared to accept a request to be able to bring a service animal to school at first, the school board should undertake a test period of allowing the service animal at school, unless the school board can demonstrate that it would be impossible to conduct such a test period without causing the school board undue hardship. A school board should not refuse a request to bring a service animal to school based on no test period and based on speculative assumptions or stereotypes.
approach such requests should not be whether the student is doing adequately at school without the service animal. The question should be whether the student could do better at reaching their potential at school if assisted by their service animal. Similarly, the question is not whether the service animal will assist the student in accessing the curriculum. Rather the relevant question is whether the service animal could assist the student with any aspect of student life in the school environment, such as social interaction, independence and self-regulation.
not refuse accommodation for a student with disability to have a service animal in class in preference of some other students or staff with no disability not to have a service animal in class. Such concerns of other students, or of staff should be addressed by making arrangements that allow the student with a disability to bring their service animal to school, while situating any objecting student or staff with no disability at an acceptable distance from them. Notwithstanding anything in such school board policies, nothing may restrict a person with vision loss, student, staff, and parent or otherwise, from being a qualified guide dog with whom they have trained to school.
ensure that principals, teachers, school office staff and families of students with disabilities know about this policy and that no attitudinal barriers impede this accommodation.
communicate and post signage that service animals are welcome at the school.

Vote passed.

M 8.3 small group five presentation and discussion: organizational barriers

Small group five presented new and revised recommendations to address organizational barriers. The small group recommendations addressed the exclusions and refusals to admit students with disabilities to schools, inter-ministerial support for students and parent participation in the transitions within K-12 to post-secondary education. The Committee had a thoughtful discussion on these topics and agreed to provide feedback following the meeting to prepare for a future vote.

M 8.4 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks thanked the members for their participation in both virtual meetings. The Chair asked small groups to review and update their recommendations based on Committee feedback to prepare for the next Committee vote. The Chair noted she will like to complete an electronic vote before the September 3, 2020 virtual meeting and reminded members to provide their key messages electronically.

K-12 education meeting 7: Tuesday July 14, 2020

Letter from chair to the minister

Date: August 12, 2020

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
777 Bay Street, 5^th Floor
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister,

K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Virtual Meeting Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the virtual meetings (“Meeting 7”) held on Tuesday July 14, 2020 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

At the meetings, the Committee discussed the revised recommendations addressing barrier area three: Assessment, Curriculum and Instruction, barrier area five: Organizational and barrier area seven: Physical and Architectural. The Committee had productive discussions throughout both virtual meetings and will provide electronic feedback to the small groups on their new and revised recommendations following the meeting.

The Committee heard an update on the progress of the work of the Education Technical Sub-Committee and the Planning for Emergencies and Safety small group. Small group seven provided an update on their meeting with the Ministry of Education’s Capital and Business Support Division prior to the meeting regarding the processes of capital funding for school boards.

Looking ahead to the Committee’s next virtual meeting, the Committee will be reviewing revised small group recommendations with the aim to finalize for voting.

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s ongoing progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting 1 information

Date: July 14, 2020 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

Location: virtual

Meeting 1 present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk, Jane Ste. Marie, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Non-voting Standards Development Committee members: Claudine Munroe (Ministry of Education)

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Susan Picarello, Mary Bartolomucci, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Stephanie Van Laeken, Elisheva Bouskila-Fox, Vinothini Kajendran and Jenna Strathearn

Ministry of Education: Charmaine Perera, Bobbi Clifton and David Moore

Captionist: Gemme Hummeny

Interpreters: Gloria Brifoglio, Sean Power

Meeting 1 minutes

M 1.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo, provided welcome remarks to the Committee, and provided an outline of the key deliverables for the meeting. The Chair thanked the small groups for all their hard work between meetings and noted the exceptional passion and commitment of the Committee members.

M 1.2 ministry presentation: considerations for drafting recommendations

Staff from the Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility gave a presentation on considerations for drafting recommendations. The presentation included key elements and considerations of a recommendation, examples of accountability measures and examples of final recommendations submitted to the government from other committees.

M 1.3 small group eight: planning for emergencies and safety barriers update and discussion

Small group eight presented new draft recommendations related to transportation, and the reorganization of their recommendations into two separate categories:

those identified for fall 2020 (interim) and applicable to students’ return to school
future (long-term) considerations

The small group will submit an interim set of recommendations specific to fall 2020 to the Committee and both ministries (Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility and Ministry of Education) by the end of July 2020.

M 1.4 small group three: assessment, curriculum and instruction barriers presentation and discussion

Small group three presented new and revised recommendations to address barriers related to assessment, curriculum and instruction. The recommendations addressed new and specialized programs involving mental health and Indigenous education, along with recommendations on school boards meeting accessibility objectives and timelines in the presented recommendations. The members agreed to provide the small group with electronic feedback following the meeting to prepare for an electronic vote.

M 1.5 next steps and closing remarks

The Chair provided a reminder that the next virtual meeting will take place on August 11, 2020. The Committee provided the key messages of the meeting and the Chair provided closing remarks.

Meeting 2 information

Date: July 14, 2020 from 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

Location: virtual

Meeting 2 present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk, Jane Ste. Marie, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Non-voting Standards Development Committee members: Claudine Munroe (Ministry of Education)

Ministry of Education: Charmaine Perera, Bobbi Clifton and David Moore

Captionist: Gemme Hummeny

Interpreters: Gloria Brifoglio, Sean Power

Meeting 2 minutes

M 2.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo, provided welcome remarks to the Committee, and provided an overview of the key deliverables for the meeting.

M 2.2 Education Technical Sub-Committee update

Committee member and Co Lead of the Education Technical Sub-Committee, Jack Stadnyk, provided an update on the work of the Technical Sub-Committee. Jack gave an overview of the work the Technical Sub-Committee members have done in systemically reviewing Committee recommendations to address any gaps in transition and provide recommendations on how to strengthen recommendations related to transitions. The Technical Sub-Committee plans to have another virtual meeting in August 2020.

M 2.3 small group five: organizational barriers presentation and discussion

Small group five presented new and revised recommendations to address organizational barriers. The small group recommendations addressed the Identification, Placement and Review Committee, Individual Education Plans and parent participation in the Individual Education Plans process. The Committee had substantial discussion on these topics and agreed to provide feedback following the meeting to prepare for an electronic vote.

M 2.4 small group seven: physical and architectural barriers update

Small group seven provided an update on their meeting with the Ministry of Education’s Capital and Business Support Division on the processes for capital funding for school boards. The small group also gave an overview on their revised recommendations addressing physical and architectural barriers, which incorporated Committee member feedback from the previous meeting and their discussion with the Capital and Business Support Division.

M 2.5 next steps and closing remarks

The Chair thanked the members for their participation in both virtual meetings. The Chair requested small groups to review their recommendations for when they will be ready to be voted upon, and also if they needed time on the August 11 meeting agenda. The Chair asked members to provide their key messages electronically and provided closing remarks for the day.

K-12 education meetings: Tuesday June 16, 2020

Letter from chair to the minister

Date: August 7, 2020

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
777 Bay Street, 5^th Floor
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Teleconference Meeting Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the two teleconference meetings (“Meeting 6”) held on Tuesday June 16, 2020 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

At the meetings, the Committee discussed the revised recommendations addressing barrier area one: Attitudes, Behaviours, Perceptions and Assumptions, barrier area three: Assessment, Curriculum and Instruction and barrier area six: Social Realms. The Committee also heard from small group seven who presented on their recommendations addressing physical and architectural barriers.

Small group seven had guest speaker, built environment expert Thea Kurdi, present with them on their recommendations addressing physical and architectural barriers in schools. The Committee had productive discussions throughout both teleconferences and will students with disabilities and parents on the return to school.

Looking ahead to the Committee’s next virtual meeting, the Committee will be reviewing revised small group recommendations with the aim to finalize for voting.

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s ongoing progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting 1 information

Date: June 16, 2020 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

Location: teleconference meeting

Meeting 1 present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk, Jane Ste. Marie Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Non-voting Standards Development Committee members: Claudine Munroe (Ministry of Education)

Ministry of Education: Charmaine Perera, Bobbi Clifton and David Moore

Captionist: Gemme Hummeny

Interpreters: Gloria Brifoglio, Sean Power

Meeting 1 minutes

M 1.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo, provided welcome remarks to the Committee, and provided an overview of the key deliverables for the meeting. The Chair thanked the small groups for making the time to meet virtually between meetings and appreciates all their hard work drafting/revising recommendations.

M 1.2 small group three: assessment, curriculum, and instruction update

Small group three provided a presentation on their revised recommendations to address barriers related to assessment, curriculum and instruction. The Committee discussed revisions to several recommendations regarding procurement, and specialized alternative and expanded curriculum for students with disabilities. The members agreed to provide the small group with electronic feedback following the meeting.

M 1.3 Education Technical Sub-Committee update

Committee member and Co Lead of the Education Technical Sub-Committee, Jack Stadnyk, provided an update on the approach of their work. Jack outlined how the Technical Sub-Committee is working in small groups to systematically address any gaps in transition in the K-12 and Post-Secondary Education Standards Development Committee draft recommendations. The Technical Sub-Committee plans to have another meeting in July 2020.

M 1.4 small group seven: physical and architectural barriers presentation with built environment expert Thea Kurdi

Small group seven presented their report and draft recommendations to address physical and architectural barriers. The small group also brought in a guest speaker, built environment expert Thea Kurdi, to present her expertise on the built environment and her ideas about improving the accessibility of buildings, including schools, which followed with a question-and-answer period. The Committee discussed how people with disabilities and accessibility building experts need to be consulted before schools are built, so accessibility is not an afterthought.

M 1.5 next steps and closing remarks

The Chair provided a reminder to members to submit their availability for potential virtual meeting dates through July, August and September. The Committee provided the key messages of the meeting and the Chair provided closing remarks.

Meeting 2 information

Date: June 16, 2020 from 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

Location: teleconference meeting

Meeting 2 present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk, Jane Ste. Marie, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Non-voting Standards Development Committee members: Claudine Munroe (Ministry of Education)

Minister’s office staff: Michael Thomas

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Susan Picarello, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Stephanie Van Laeken, Elisheva Bouskila-Fox, Vinothini Kajendran and Jenna Strathearn

Other staff: Charmaine Perera (Ministry of Education), Bobbi Clifton (Ministry of Education) and David Moore (Ministry of Education)

Guest: Honourable Stephen Lecce (Minister of Education and Partial Attendance)

Captionist: Gemme Hummeny

Interpreters: Gloria Brifoglio, Sean Power

Regrets: Mary Bartolomucci

Meeting 2 minutes

M 2.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo, provided welcome remarks to the Committee, and provided an overview of the key deliverables for the meeting.

M 2.2 small group one: attitudes, behaviours, perceptions and assumptions presentation

Small group one presented their revisions to the deferred recommendations from the January meeting. The small group revisions included clarification on the intent of their recommendations, added in Committee member feedback and timelines for implementation.

M 2.3 small group six: social realms presentation

Following up on the May 6 teleconference, small group six took into the consideration the feedback from Committee members and revised their draft recommendations. The small group added definitions into the Committee glossary of terms, made revisions to their recommendations regarding service animals and highlighted the importance of sharing information between school boards and breaking down social isolation in schools.

M 2.4 new small group: planning for emergencies and safety update

Donna Edwards provided an update on the mandate and draft recommendations of the new small group. The small group is using what they have learned from the COVID‑19 pandemic and reoccurring accessibility barriers for students with disabilities. The group focused on remote learning to develop an emergency plan framework that covers all of the phases (preparing, planning, response and recovery) to allow for a systemic response to an emergency across school boards.

M 2.5 remarks from the Minister of Education and report of work group chairs on focused questions:

where have there been improvements for students with disabilities?
on May 6, in your advice about transition back to school, you noted that parents of students with some disabilities may be reluctant to have their children return to class while there is a perceived risk of infection. How should schools and educators prepare to address that concern?

Each of the small group leads presented their small group’s feedback and advice to the minister. The highlights of the Committee’s feedback include:

a clear communication plan on the return to school is needed for parents and students, with one point of contact to deal with COVID‑19 related issues at all levels to ensure consistency of communications
school boards must have clear and effective communication plans around safety protocols for students who require the support of personal support workers
a need for a provision of personal protection equipment for staff
consultation with health officials so contact tracing can be done
ensuring more capacity for educational assessments and accessibility supports so students can have access to these supports right away when school returns
no matter what, students with disabilities have a right to education, any issues around returning to school should not exclude students with disabilities from schools
there must be flexibility in the transition back to school, students may need extra support and there may be anxiety among students regrading loss of learning and lack of physical connection
in-person social learning is important between students, cannot only rely on remote learning
improvements have been seen in schools where video calls are used for students to engage with their peers because of the increase in personal connection
ensuring access to accessible transportation to school for students with disabilities

Members expressed interest in providing more feedback as needed if called to do so by the minister.

M 2.3 next steps and closing remarks

The Chair thanked Minister Lecce for seeking the Committee’s advice and feedback once again to support students with disabilities during this time. The Chair reminded members to submit any additional written feedback and it will be forwarded on to the Ministry of Education for further review.

K-12 education meetings 5: May 5 and 6, 2020

Letter from chair to the minister

June 8, 2020

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
5^th Floor, 777 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Teleconference Meeting Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the teleconference meetings held on Tuesday May 5, 2020 and Wednesday May 6, 2020 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

At the meetings, the Committee discussed the revised recommendations addressing barrier area three: Assessment, Curriculum and Instruction. The Committee also heard from two small groups addressing barriers related to: Organizational Barriers and Social Realms. The Committee had lively discussions and will provide electronic feedback following the meetings. The Committee also had an opportunity to provide advice to the Minister of Education and Minister for Seniors and Accessibility on how to support students with disabilities while schools are closed and the transition back when schools reopen.

Looking ahead to the Committee’s next virtual meeting, we will begin discussions on the Built Environment and review deferred recommendations from previous small group presentations.

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s ongoing progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Day 1: Meeting 1 information

Date: May 5, 2020 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

Location: teleconference meeting

Day 1 present 1

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Ministry of Education: Charmaine Perera, Bobbi Clifton and David Moore

Captionist: Gemme Hummeny

Interpreters: Kate Lewis, Sean Power

Regrets: Jane Ste. Marie

Day 1 meeting 1 minutes

M 1.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo, provided welcome remarks to the Committee, and provided an overview of the key deliverables for the meeting. The Chair shared her gratitude and appreciation to the small groups for coming together and producing great work during this time. The Chair introduced a new volunteer-based small group to address emergency planning for students with disabilities due to the COVID‑19 pandemic. The small group is called Emergency Planning and Safety working group.

M 1.2 ministry updates

Assistant Deputy Minister Susan Picarello of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Division provided remarks. She looked forward to the discussion and new creative ways of getting the Committee work done and wishes everyone well during this time.

M 1.3 small group three: assessment, curriculum and instruction presentation

Small group three provided a presentation on their revised and proposed new recommendations to address barriers related to assessment, curriculum and instruction. The Committee discussed the expansion of curriculum for students with learning, developmental and vision loss disabilities. The members agreed to provide the small group with electronic feedback following the meeting.

M 1.4 committee member updates

Members provided updates on the current work they are doing in their fields and Lynn provided an update on the Joint Education Technical Sub-Committee and the Post-Secondary Education Standards Development Committee. Members provided congratulatory remarks to Committee member David Lepofsky on his Samuel E. Gates Litigation Award from the American College of Trial Lawyers.

M 1.5 next steps and closing remarks

The Chair provided a reminder to members to submit their availability for the next potential virtual meeting date on June 16 or 17. The Committee provided the key messages of the meeting and the Chair provided closing remarks.

Day 1 meeting 2 information

Date: May 5, 2020 from 3:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

Location: teleconference meeting

Meeting 2 present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Ministry of Education: Charmaine Perera, Bobbi Clifton and David Moore

Captionist: Gemme Hummeny

Interpreters: Kate Lewis, Sean Power

Regrets: Victoria Nolan, Jane Ste. Marie

Day 1 meeting 2 minutes

M 2.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo, provided welcome remarks to the Committee, and provided an overview of the key deliverables for the meeting. The Chair shared her gratitude for all the participants on the teleconference in the morning and coming back on again for the afternoon discussion. She appreciates the amazing work and passion of all the Committee members during this time.

M 2.2 small group five: organizational barriers presentation

Small group five continued their presentation from the in-person meeting on February 12 on their proposed recommendations to address barriers related to organizational policies and procedures. Following the presentation, the Committee discussed recommendations related to policies and procedures on transitions, Individual Education Plans, training qualifications and school board accessibility plans. The Committee will provide follow-up feedback to the small group electronically following the meeting.

M 2.3 next steps and closing remarks

The Chair provided a reminder to members about the meeting with the Minister of Education and the Minister for Seniors and Accessibility the following morning and small group six’s presentation in the afternoon. The Chair did a call out of the key messages of the meeting and provided closing remarks.

Day 2: meeting 1 information

Date: May 6, 2020 from 11:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

Location: teleconference meeting

Day 2: meeting 1 present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: the Honourable Raymond Cho (Minister for Seniors and Accessibility), Michael Thomas, Mihaela Dumitrascu, Susan Picarello, Mary Bartolomucci, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Stephanie Van Laeken, Elisheva Bouskila-Fox, Vinothini Kajendran and Jenna Strathearn

Ministry of Education staff: the Honourable Stephen Lecce (Minister of Education), Jeff Butler, Charmaine Perera, Bobbi Clifton and David Moore

Other participants: Jeremy Roberts, Member of Provincial Parliament (Ottawa West – Napean), Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services (Community and Social Services) and Amy Fee, Member of Provincial Parliament (Kitchener South – Hespeler), Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services (Children and Autism)

Captionist: Gemme Hummeny

Interpreters: Kate Lewis, Sean Power

Regrets: Jane Ste. Marie

Day 2: meeting 1 minutes

M 3.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo, provided welcome remarks to the Committee, guest speakers and provided an overview of the key deliverables for the meeting.

M 3.2 introductory remarks – the Honourable Raymond Cho

Minister Cho provided introductory remarks to the Committee and mentioned how eager he was to hear the Committee’s feedback and advice. The Minister appreciates his colleague Minister Lecce’s keen interest in the Committee’s work and what he has been doing to help Ontario’s education system. Minister Cho acknowledged how important the input of the Committee is now more than ever and values the work the Committee is doing.

M 3.3 remarks – the Honourable Stephen Lecce

Minister Lecce echoed the remarks from Minister Cho and noted that Amy Fee and Jeremy Roberts, both Parliamentary Assistants, were also on the teleconference to hear the Committee’s advice. The minister mentioned the goal of the conversation is to move the conversation forward on how to provide accessible education online and to mitigate the stress students and families are feeling during this time, as well as, looking ahead to transitioning back to schools when they re-open. The minister stated that he looked forward to hearing the Committee’s advice and feedback on these important areas. He closed his remarks by saying that he is committed to working with Minister Cho and his colleagues throughout this journey.

M 3.4 report presentations from the small group leads on key questions:

what are the current successes in terms of continuity of learning supports for students with disabilities during this time of school closures and remote learning?
what are the gaps/barriers students with disabilities are facing during this time?
what are some insights to ensure the transition back to school is successful for students with disabilities?

Each of the small group leads presented their small group’s feedback and advice to the ministers. The highlights of the Committee’s feedback include:

the need for accessible technology and resources supported by coaching and support for parents
the importance of consistent direction from Ministry of Education to provincial boards
to ensure the inclusivity of students continue beyond the current crisis, when school boards are planning for the return of students
support for the mental health of students during the crisis to ensure there is still motivation for learning
to focus on social-emotional health and well-being and consider the whole child, rather than a narrow focus on academic learning
concern for students with disabilities who are at higher risk for COVID‑19, as government looks toward re-entry to school
the need for more work to do around creating secure and accessible online learning platforms
social distancing measures are difficult for students with disabilities who require support persons (as in a group home)

Members expressed interest in providing more feedback as needed if called to do so by the ministers.

M 3.5 closing remarks – Chair, Lynn Ziraldo

The Chair thanked both ministers for their time and for seeking the Committee’s advice and feedback. The Chair mentioned that the Committee’s written report of feedback will also be provided to the Ministry of Education for further review. The Chair closed with these final thoughts:

the Committee members are passionate about their work and will have to continue to collaborate to create a strong and equitable system for students in Ontario
the key words of the conversation today are: seamless, consistency and accessible – this is what we need to give to people
the Committee will submit their comprehensive 43-page report of further advice and feedback to both ministers based on the discussion today

Day 2: meeting 2 information

Date: May 6, 2020 from 1:30 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

Location: teleconference meeting

Day 2: meeting 2 present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Ministry of Education staff: Charmaine Perera, Bobbi Clifton and David Moore

Captionist: Gemme Hummeny

Interpreters: Kate Lewis, Sean Power

Regrets: Jane Ste. Marie

Day 2: meeting 2 minutes

M 4.1 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo, provided welcome remarks to the Committee, and provided an overview of the key deliverables for the meeting. The Chair shared her gratitude for the members’ commitment to the four teleconferences over the past two days. She acknowledged the staff and members for all the time and effort made to make these teleconferences happen.

M 4.2 small group six: social realms presentation

Small group six provided a presentation on proposed recommendations to address barriers related to social realms in K-12 Education. Following the presentation, the Committee had a widespread discussion on co-op/employment opportunities, experiential learning placements and service animals. The small group will provide an updated report after receiving electronic feedback from Committee members.

M 4.3 next steps and closing remarks

M 4.4 ministry closing remarks

The ministry would like to congratulate the Chair, Lynn Ziraldo, on receiving the International Courtesy Resolution on behalf of Ontario Council for Exception Children and Pioneers Division at the CEC international convention representative assembly in Portland, Oregon.

K-12 education meeting 4: Wednesday February 12, 2020

Letter from chair to the minister

Date: February 25, 2020

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
777 Bay Street, 5^th Floor
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Meeting 4 – Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the Meeting (“Meeting 4”) held on February 12, 2020 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

At the Meeting, the Committee heard a presentation from the Ontario College of Teachers on professional development and additional qualifications. The Committee discussed recommendations addressing barrier area one: Attitudes, Behaviors, Perceptions and Assumptions, as well as recommendations addressing barrier area four: Digital Learning and Technology. These recommendations were deferred for further revision by members and may be voted on by email in advance of the Committee’s next scheduled meeting.

The Committee also heard from small group five addressing Organizational Barriers. As a result of our discussions, the Committee passed 18 initial recommendations to address Organizational Barriers.

All recommendations to date are considered draft until finalized and included in the Initial Recommendations Report, which will be submitted to you.

Looking ahead to the Committee’s fifth meeting, we will begin discussions on barriers related to Social Realms and the Built Environment and review deferred recommendations from this meeting.

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s ongoing progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting information

Date: February 12, 2020

Location: 777 Bay Street, Toronto, Ontario, 6^th Floor, Universal Boardroom

Present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley (teleconference), David Lepofsky, Wendy Lau, Michelle Longlade (teleconference), Jane Ste. Marie, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan (teleconference), Ben Smith (partial), Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Non-voting Standards Development Committee members: Claudine Munroe (Ministry of Education)

Minister’s office staff: Michael Thomas

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Marie Dannhaeuser (partial), Susan Picarello, Mary Bartolomucci, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Stephanie Van Laeken, Elisheva Bouskila-Fox, Vinothini Kajendran, Jenna Strathearn, Nilusha Rattansi and Kulpreet Kaur Thukral

Other staff: Jeff Butler (Ministry of Education), Charmaine Perera (Ministry of Education) and David Moore (Ministry of Education)

Guests: Déirdre Smith (Ontario College of Teachers and Partial Attendance), Honourable Stephen Lecce (Minister of Education and Partial Attendance)

Captionist: Gemme Humenny

Interpreters: Carolyn Lesonsky, Gloria Brifoglio and Sean Power

Attendant support: Carolyn Loppie, Samira Kassem

Meeting Minutes

M 4.1 housekeeping and logistical information

Ministry staff reviewed the emergency safety information for the meeting venue and logistical information for the day.

M 4.2 reflection

Committee member Jack Stadnyk provided a reflection regarding the intentions of the meeting.

M 4.3 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The goal of the meeting was for the Committee to accomplish the following deliverables:

to review the revised deferred recommendations from small groups one: Attitudes, Behaviours, Perceptions and Assumptions and four: Digital Learning and Technology based on the discussion at the January 8 meeting
to review the report and draft recommendations from small group five related to Organizational Barriers

M 4.4 presentation from Ontario College of Teachers: overview of additional qualifications

Déirdre Smith, Manager of Standards of Practice and Education within the Ontario College of Teachers, made a presentation to the Committee. The presentation provided an overview of Additional Qualification courses and programs for teachers related to Special Education and the needs of students with disabilities. This included a discussion of recent work undertaken to review and update Additional Qualifications in this area, with a strong emphasis on consultation with students and parents. Discussion and the opportunity for questions and answers followed the presentation.

M 4.5 presentation from the Ministry of Education: follow-up on questions from the January 8 meeting

Jeff Butler, Assistant Deputy Minister of the Student Support & Field Services Division, and Claudine Munroe, Director of the Special Education / Success for All Branch within the Ministry of Education, provided answers to questions members gave at the previous meeting. This included a number of questions related to data collection at the board and ministry level, as well as a discussion on barriers to student engagement in development of Individual Education Plans.

M 4.6 presentation from Jack Stadnyk: update on the Education Technical Sub Committee

Committee member and Co Lead of the Education Technical Sub Committee Jack Stadnyk provided an update on their work, which included the agenda items for the next meeting on February 24, 2020.

M 4.7 business arising: barrier one: Attitudes, Behaviours, Perceptions and Assumptions – updated deferred recommendations from small group one

Small group one presented their revisions to the deferred recommendations from the January meeting. After review, the Committee decided to defer the recommendations once again for further review by the small group members.

M 4.8 business arising: barrier four: Digital Learning and Technology from small group four

Small group four presented their revisions to the deferred recommendations from the January meeting. After review, the Committee decided to defer the recommendations once again for further review by the small group members.

M 4.9 barrier five: Organizational Barriers – small group five report

Small group five presented their report and draft recommendations to address barriers related to Organizational Barriers. As a result of the Committee’s discussion and feedback on the small group’s report, the Committee passed the following draft initial recommendations:

Motion 4.1: carried – barrier five, recommendation 1.A.1:

A. The Ministry of Education shall:

1.A.1 Ensure that no student with a disability is excluded from eligibility for programs and services, including special education programs and services, that they require due to definitions or criteria that are inconsistent with the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, the Ontario Human Rights Code or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Vote passed.

Motion 4.2: carried – barrier five, recommendation 1.A.2:

A. The Ministry of Education shall:

1.A.2 Broaden the definition of accommodations or “accommodate” used in special education to be consistent with the term, accommodations, used in the Ontario Human Rights Code so that school boards shall ensure that all students receive needed services, supports accommodations or other educational opportunities including but not limited to special education programs and services.

Vote passed.

Motion 4.3: carried – barrier five, recommendation 1.A.3:

A. The Ministry of Education shall:

1.A.3 Ensure that school boards fulfil their duty to accommodate the disability-related needs of students with disabilities, in relation to all school-related activities, and that the policies are in place to ensure that they do so.

Vote passed.

Motion 4.4: carried – barrier five, recommendation 1.B.1:

B. District School Boards shall:

1.B.1 Ensure that students with a disability shall have access to and receive any programs and services, including special education or other disability-related services or supports that they require, in accordance with the Ontario Human Rights Code on the duty to accommodate people with disabilities.

Vote passed.

Motion 4.5: carried – barrier five, recommendation 2.A.1:

A. The Ministry of Education shall:

2.A.1 Ensure accountability and oversight to ensure that District School Boards are fulfilling their responsibilities to meet the needs of students with disabilities.

Vote passed.

Motion 4.6: carried – barrier five, recommendation 2.A.2:

A. The Ministry of Education shall:

2.A.2 Create an ombudsman/oversight office where students’ and parents’ concerns regarding the provision of education for students with disabilities can be investigated and resolved.

Vote passed.

Motion 4.7: carried – barrier five, recommendation 2.A.3:

A. The Ministry of Education shall:

2.A.3 Designate an Assistant Deputy Minister with the needed authority to be responsible for ensuring a barrier-free and accessible school system for students with disabilities.

Vote passed.

Motion 4.8: carried – barrier five, recommendation 2.A.4:

A. The Ministry of Education shall:

2.A.4 Mandate that the designated Assistant Deputy Minister shall have in place a permanent advisory committee representing individuals with disabilities, including students with disabilities and their parents, that reflects the needs of high-incidence and low-incidence disabilities.

Vote passed.

Motion 4.9: carried – barrier five, recommendation 2.A.5:

A. The Ministry of Education shall:

2.A.5 Ensure monitoring, auditing, surveying and feedback of District School Boards’ provision of education to students with disabilities, including Special Education and Accessibility Plans, to ensure compliance with the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, the Ontario Human Rights Code and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Vote passed.

Motion 4.10: carried – barrier five, recommendation 2.A.6:

A. The Ministry of Education shall:

2.A.6 Collaborate with the Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility, and make public and provide effective practices in terms of Special Education and Accessibility Planning.

Vote passed.

Motion 4.11: carried – barrier five, recommendation 2.B.1:

B. District School Boards shall:

2.B.1 Ensure and demonstrate their accountability that the needs of students with disabilities are met.

Vote passed.

Motion 4.12: carried – barrier five, recommendation 2.B.2:

B. District School Boards shall:

2.B.2 Ensure that their Mission, Vision and Values statements and all of their policies, procedures and practices, are in compliance with the equality rights of students with disabilities in the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, the Ontario Human Rights Code and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Vote passed.

Motion 4.13: failed – barrier five, recommendation 3.1:

3.1. That all students with disabilities have Individual Education Plans, unless the student, parent or guardian objects. This recommendation and related draft recommendations were deferred for further review.

Motion 4.14: carried – barrier five, preamble for recommendation on parent and student participation

All of the students with disabilities and the parents/guardians of those students have the right to fully participate in the planning and implementation of the student’s educational plan/program.

Vote passed.

Motion 4.15: carried – barrier five, recommendation 4.A.1:

A. The Ministry of Education shall:

4.A.1 Ensure effective processes and resources used for planning for all students with disabilities to ensure that students and parents/guardians are able to participate effectively in the process.

Vote passed.

Motion 4.16: carried – barrier five, recommendation 4.A.2:

A. The Ministry of Education shall:

4.A.2 Develop a timely formal process/dispute resolution mechanism for parents/guardians and students to appeal the contents or implementation of Individual Education Plans, to make necessary changes if required and to ensure that district school boards follow it.

Vote passed.

Motion 4.17: carried – barrier five, recommendation 4.A.3:

A. The Ministry of Education shall:

4.A.3 In cases where disputes cannot be resolved at the school board level, appoint an arm’s length third party mediator when parents and/or students can show that the school is not effectively meeting their needs.

Vote passed.

Motion 4.18: carried – barrier five, recommendation 4.B.1:

B. The District School Boards shall:

4.B.1 Provide parents/guardians of students with disabilities and, where applicable, students with disabilities themselves, with timely and effective information, in accessible formats, on the available services, programs and supports for students with disabilities (whether or not they are classified as students with special education needs under the Education Act and Regulations).

Vote passed.

Motion 4.19: carried – barrier five, recommendation 4.B.2:

B. The District School Boards shall:

4.B.2 Ensure that parents, guardians and students are informed, as early as possible, in a readily-accessible and understandable way, about important information such as:

what “special education” is and who is entitled to receive it
what the rights are to full participation in and full inclusion in all the school board's education and other programming, and to be accommodated in connection with those programs under the Ontario Human Rights Code and Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, whether or not the student is classified as a student with special education needs under Ontario's Education Act and regulations
the menu of options, placements, programs, services, supports and accommodations available at the school board for students with disabilities
who to approach at the school board to get this information, and how to request placements, programs, supports, services or accommodations for students with disabilities, including the development of Individual Education Plans, or to raise concerns about whether the school board is effectively meeting the student’s education needs

Vote passed.

Further recommendations related to Organizational Barriers were deferred for additional review and refinement.

M 4.10 remarks from the Honourable Stephen Lecce, Minister of Education

The Chair introduced the Honourable Stephen Lecce, Minister of Education, and thanked him for taking the time to speak with the Committee.

Minister Lecce thanked the Committee for their efforts and emphasized that accessibility and inclusion are a shared passion for both himself and the Honourable Raymond Cho, Minister for Seniors and Accessibility. He provided an overview of recent work and investments to expand and strengthen accessibility in schools and to build a culture of inclusion in Ontario. Following the Minister’s remarks, the Committee had the opportunity for some questions and answers, and a photo with the Minister.

M 4.11 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the staff and Committee for all their dedicated work. The Committee discussed the key messages of the meeting, which included the deliverables of the meeting and the major themes from their discussions on barriers related to Organizational Barriers. The Committee plans to address Social Realms and Built Environment Barriers as well as deferred recommendations at the next meeting on April 1, 2020.

K-12 education meeting 3: Wednesday January 8, 2020

Letter from chair to the minister

Date: January 30, 2020

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Minister for Seniors and Accessibility
777 Bay Street, 5^th Floor
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Meeting 3 – Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the Meeting (“Meeting 3”) held on January 8, 2020 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

At the Meeting, the Committee discussed the revised deferred recommendations addressing barrier area one: Attitudes, Behaviors, Perceptions and Assumptions. The Committee also heard from two small groups addressing barriers related to: Assessment, Curriculum and Instruction and Digital Learning and Technology. As a result of our discussions, the Committee unanimously passed eleven draft initial recommendations: seven recommendations address Assessment, Curriculum and Instruction and four address Digital Learning and Technology. The Committee reflected on our past discussions regarding the long-term objective and had thoughtful discussions on what should be included. The Committee will continue to discuss and draft our long-term objective.

Looking ahead to the Committee’s fourth meeting, we will begin discussions on the Organizational Barriers (to include policies and procedures) and review deferred recommendations.

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s ongoing progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting information

Date: January 8, 2020

Location: Universal Boardroom, 6^th Floor, 777 Bay Street, Toronto, Ontario

Present

Standards Development Committee members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley (teleconference), David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Douglas Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan (teleconference), Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco and Lindy Zaretsky

Non-voting Standards Development Committee members: Claudine Munroe (Ministry of Education)

Minister’s office staff: Michael Thomas

Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility staff: Marie Dannhaeuser, Mary Bartolomucci, Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Stephanie Van Laeken, Vinothini Kajendran and Jenna Strathearn

Other staff: Charmaine Perera (Ministry of Education), Venetta Miranda (Ministry of Education) and David Moore (Ministry of Education)

Captionist: Deanna Santedicola

Interpreters: Carolyn Lesonsky, Gloria Brifoglio and Sean Power

Attendant support: Carolyn Loppie, Samira Kassem

Regrets: Wendy Lau, Jane Ste. Marie

Meeting Minutes

M 3.1 housekeeping and logistical information

Ministry staff reviewed the emergency safety information for the meeting venue and logistical information for the day.

M 3.2 reflection

Committee member Douglas Mein provided a reflection regarding the intentions of the meeting.

M 3.3 Chair’s welcome and review of agenda

The goal of the meeting was for the Committee to accomplish the following deliverables:

to review the revised deferred recommendations from small group one based on the discussion at the November 12 meeting
to review the reports and draft recommendations from small groups three and four related to Assessment, Curriculum and Instruction and Digital Learning and Technology to discuss and review the long-term objective

M 3.4 presentation from the Ministry of Education: education sector overview

Claudine Monroe, Director of the Special Education/Success for All Branch within the Ministry of Education, made a presentation to the Committee. The presentation provided an overview of the education sector, which included information on the roles and responsibilities of the Ministry of Education, legislative requirements, trends in special education, funding and more. Members provided follow up questions to the Ministry of Education to be answered at the following meeting.

M 3.5 presentation from the Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility: considerations for drafting recommendations

Ministry staff gave a presentation on considerations to drafting recommendations to the Committee for their use when drafting initial recommendations.

M 3.6 presentation from Jack Stadnyk: update on the Education Technical Sub Committee.

Committee member and Co Lead of the Education Technical Sub Committee Jack Stadnyk provided an update on their work including the definition of transition and barriers related to students transitioning from K-12 to post-secondary education institutions and employment.

M 3.7 business arising: barrier one: Attitudes, Behaviours, Perceptions and Assumptions – updated deferred recommendations from small group one

Small group one presented their revisions to the deferred recommendations from the November meeting. After review, the Committee decided to defer the recommendations once again for further review based on the feedback heard from the Committee.

M 3.8 barrier three: Assessment, Curriculum and Instruction – small group three report

Small group three presented their report and draft recommendations to address barriers related to Assessment, Curriculum and Instruction. As a result of the Committee’s discussion and feedback on the small group’s report, the Committee passed the following draft initial recommendations:

Motion 3.1: carried – barrier three: recommendation one

Rationale/key message recommendation one

Students’ cultural contexts are fundamental to their learning. Culture is defined here by a student’s identity as well as by their homes, schools and communities. Creating culturally relevant curriculum, assessment practices and instruction invite students to draw connections between their learning and direct experiences in their communities. To this end, teachers and students should perceive those experiences as valuable assets in all classrooms.

"All instruction is culturally responsive. The question is: To which culture is it currently oriented?" Gloria Ladson-Billings

Curriculum, assessment and instructional design and application needs to demonstrate commitment to social justice values, democratic processes and the formation of students as life-long learners and engaged citizens with knowledge, skills and dispositions enabling them to participate fully and actively in society.

Curriculum & instruction recommendation (C) one

C1: That the design, development, provision and communication of curriculum (resources and experiences) ensure full accessibility, equity and inclusion in serving and supporting each learner while addressing cultural responsiveness, the dignity and developing independence of each person and learning for all.

Assessment & accountability recommendation (A) one

A1: That educational and clinical school staff engage in culturally responsive (fair) assessment practices that reflect an understanding and respect for perspectives different from our own, and that students have an opportunity to engage in performance assessments in diverse learning contexts, that provides them with a critical space in which to reflect on and share their personal stories/lived experiences and their identities as learners.

Vote passed.

Motion 3.2: carried – barrier three: recommendation two

Rationale/key message recommendation two

In the end, a true measure of equity, access and inclusion for all in our schools is how well students from diverse backgrounds and with disabilities achieve in schools. This measure needs to include student voices in assessing how they are doing.

Learners develop an understanding of themselves through ongoing opportunities for self-reflection, self-regulation and self-monitoring supported by educator’s sensitivity to personal needs, culture and development.

Instructional resources/materials need to be reflective and responsive to student identity, culture and learning needs. This requires all those developing resources to ensure design principles of Universal Design for Learning, timely conversion ready access including multiple formats.

Curriculum & instruction recommendation two

C2: That all learners, including students with disabilities and diverse learning needs are ensured every opportunity to fully access and participate in meaningful, challenging learning opportunities and curriculum engagement. This includes the timely access, use and the benefits of curriculum goods and services that are fully accessible through integrated Universal Design for Learning, including multiple, alternative measures for engagement, representation, expression and communication.

Assessment & accountability recommendation two

A2: That students be explicitly instructed in self-assessment methods so that their observations and reflections on their own learning can provide valuable feedback to teachers in refining their instructional plans.

Vote passed.

Motion 3.3: carried – barrier three: recommendation three

Rationale/key message recommendation three

There's a difference between curriculum and pedagogy. Curriculum is all about what we teach. Pedagogy is about how we teach it.

When addressing Curriculum, Assessment and Instruction, there is an explicit interconnected relationship between them. It is impossible to design curriculum without developing a deep understanding of who the students are through assessment (getting to know them) and ensuring their identities are reflected in the curriculum design and classroom resources, in instructional methods (how do we know how they learn best) and in fair assessment practices.

Curriculum & instruction recommendation three

C3: That the Ministry of Education, school boards and schools/colleges of education responsible for pre-service and ongoing professional learning and leadership development in each discipline and domain ensure the principles and practices of Universal Design for Learning and Differentiated Instruction are infused within curriculum assessment and instruction, including procurement requirements and use of instructional resources, optimizing teaching and learning for all.

Assessment & accountability recommendation three

A3:

a) That pre-service, in-service and ongoing job-embedded professional learning on diagnostic, formative and summative curriculum-based and more formal assessments be provided to educators to inform differentiated instruction for all learners.

b) That school and system leaders refine their respective roles assuring: designing, assessing, evaluating, reporting and monitoring of Universal Design for Learning and Differentiated Instruction in their schools as it relates to access, equity and inclusion for all learners.

Vote passed.

Motion 3.4: carried – barrier three: recommendation four

Rationale/key message recommendation four

The focus for all curriculum-based and clinical assessments should be primarily used to inform differentiated instruction for students based on their talents, strengths and needs, and not as a means to prematurely “remove” students from accessing the provincial curriculum/and or age-appropriate regular education classroom based solely on diagnosis and identification. A developmental gap argument based on assessments, continues to be made in schools, resulting in premature narrowing of pathways (alternative curriculum replaces the Ontario curriculum rather than a balance of both where needed) creating barriers to accessing credit-bearing courses and post-secondary education destinations. Current research (see Parekh & Brown, 2018, 19) provides evidence that racialized minority students are disproportionately segregated in special education classrooms with fewer pathways remaining open to them over the duration of their school careers.

Assessment expertise by qualified individuals and sensitivity to specific learner needs and disabilities needs to inform the multi/transdisciplinary team planning and monitoring process with regard to appropriate program and placement options (for example, regular education placements, special class placements, special school placements).

Inclusion and Universal Design for Learning principles in program and learning design extends beyond formal classroom learning to multiple diverse experiences including outdoor and experiential learning, social and recreational activities, extra-curricular, community engagement and specialized pathways to success.

Curriculum & instruction recommendation four

C4: That the Ministry of Education, school boards and schools/faculties of education enable and ensure student voice and engagement in the curriculum design, learning and assessment experiences ensure opportunity to create person-directed learning and transition plans and full equitable access to multiple, adaptable pathways.

Assessment & accountability recommendation four

A4:

a) That the Ministry of Education, educational and clinical school board staff commit to policies and processes that ensure fair, barrier-free assessment of student performance and learning for students with disabilities with provision and responsiveness to alternative, timely, flexible format and personalized for learner needs and identities.

b) That students have full access to learning opportunities, ongoing feedback and sufficiently diverse programming experiences in and beyond the classroom within multiple, adaptive and flexible learning environments and across differentiated pathways that are responsive to a wide spectrum of individual and cultural learning needs.

c) That students have full equitable inclusion and access to multiple adaptive pathways, experiential learning and specialized programs whereby admissions, resources, the learning environment, professional learning and supports are planned, openly communicated and monitored for student need and barrier-free participation and engagement.

Vote passed.

Motion 3.5: carried – barrier three: recommendation five

Rationale/key message recommendation five

Ongoing continuous interaction that recognizes and celebrates students’ voice, personal experiences and family voices as authentic sources of (self) knowledge reflected in co-negotiated program and personalized planning, leading to progressive curriculum, assessment and instructional design.

The learning environment needs to create spaces for shared learning where all students, including those with diverse learning needs, can identify and celebrate their heritage, culture and identity. For example, ongoing development of provincial curriculum and supports that respect individual disability needs and learning contexts.

The ministries, boards and public organizations need to have ongoing strategies and procedures that are inclusive and accessible to survey, gather information and create optimal responsive and current learning opportunities for life-long learning for all.

Curriculum & instruction recommendation five

C5:

a) That two-way interactive communication with learners, partners in learning, families, educators, communities and the greater public be open, available and fully accessible in preferred formats for persons with disabilities ensuring methods for timely, flexible use and benefit and

b) That ongoing input, feedback and monitoring processes include open communication, regular policy design and review and ongoing procedures and practices ensuring full access, equity and inclusion. This is required by the Ministry of Education, school boards and their partners enabling ongoing lifelong learning for students, families and the wider community.

Assessment & accountability recommendation five

A5: That online learning environments facilitate learning and engagement with others:

a) Through alternative mechanisms by which information exchange, collaboration and learning can take place and

b) That these environments form an integral part of an accessible curriculum and assessment-informed instructional strategies for a wide range of abilities and needs that students have and

c) That the design of these learning spaces be as flexible as possible to accommodate those needs and preferences.

Vote passed.

Motion 3.6: carried – barrier three: recommendation six

Rationale/key message recommendation six

There is a gap in knowing what accessible, equitable and inclusive curriculum, assessment and instructional resources have been developed within school boards, but may not yet been shared widely including in multiple, accessible formats. The question that educators need to ask is, “Am I designing curriculum to be as accessible as possible with the resources I have or are out there but are not yet accessible to me?”

A resource list is appended with an early sampling of potential references.

Inter-agency, inter-ministry transparency and seamless points of access and policy alignments enable families, students and educators the access to early and ongoing shared supports and ensures a school has preparedness and readiness for students of varying diverse learning needs.

Ongoing development of universally designed open source resources, fully accessible and/or conversion-ready shared across boards and agencies, for students, families, board, ministry training, enables greater effective resource use, awareness and capacity building across sectors.

Curriculum & instruction recommendation six

C6: That a dedicated accessibility hub of continuously updated central (for example, online) resources and research-based initiatives, opportunities, awareness sensitivity and ethical practice in equity, accessibility and inclusion be developed, available, openly accessible and mobilized across education sectors ensuring learners of all abilities can flourish and thrive. That the provincial government enable infrastructure for accessibility hub frameworks across ministries, education sectors and public domain.

Assessment & accountability recommendation six

A6: That research-informed culturally responsive pedagogy and assessment-informed practices be widely shared throughout district school boards through professional learning networks and online knowledge repositories, so that all students can access an equitable, inclusive and strengths-based education in classrooms, and through experiential learning experiences that can drive civic and community engagement.

Vote passed.

Motion 3.7: carried – barrier three: recommendation seven

Rationale/key message recommendation seven

Students, staff and teacher candidates are being taught about Human Rights and Accessible Education in a variety of ways, often as a response to particular issues related to local and global contexts of exclusion and marginalization. A more systemic and integrated approach to embedding Ontario Human Rights Code and Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act throughout the curriculum, learning expectations and core competencies for students and staff should advance accessible, inclusive and equitable educational practices for all. Access to shared curriculum resources that address lived experiences and expertise (for example, inter-ministry, community-developed resources, association sources, working documents) helps to create and sustain accessibility, inclusion building, awareness, knowledge, skills and dispositions.

Curriculum & instruction recommendation seven

C7: That curriculum on equity, accessibility and inclusion including teaching and learning of lived experiences of persons with disabilities, Ontario Human Rights Code and Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, be reviewed, developed, integrated and implemented within the provincial curriculum, core competencies and learning expectations.

Assessment & accountability recommendation seven

A7: That assessments address equity, access and inclusion by ensuring the lived experiences of persons with disabilities informs fair assessment practices connected to the provincial curriculum, core competencies and learning expectations for students and staff.

Vote passed.

M 3.9 barrier four: Digital Learning and Technology – small group four report

Small group four presented their report and draft recommendations to address barriers related to Digital Learning and Technology. As a result of the Committee’s discussion and feedback on the small group’s report, the Committee decided to defer three recommendations for further review and passed the following draft initial recommendations:

Motion 3.8: carried – barrier four: recommendation one

Require school boards to consult with educators, parents/care-givers and students in the design of professional development and training activities in the use of accessible technologies.

Vote passed.

Motion 3.9: carried – barrier four: recommendation two

Require boards to develop, implement, monitor and evaluate comprehensive training programs for its staff on procuring and using accessible digital technology.

Vote passed.

Motion 3.10: carried – barrier four: recommendation three

Require school boards to designate an accessible “digital/technology lead” (a board-level staff appointment) that will support educators in the procurement and use of digital technologies and will be responsible for all digital information at the school and system level.

Vote passed.

Motion 3.11: carried – barrier four: recommendation four

Recommendation for the Ministry of Education:

Ensure the Ministry of Education provides sufficient long-term funding through the Grants for Student Needs to support boards in acquiring and supporting assistive technologies and related hardware and software via enhancements to the Special Education Grant. This should also include funding for any student with any kind of disability defined in the Ontario Human Rights Code and Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act.

Vote passed.

M 3.10 presentation from the Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility: long-term objective

The Committee reflected on their past discussions regarding the long-term objective and had thoughtful discussions on what should be included. As a result of their discussion, a small group of members would review previous materials developed on the long-term objective and circulate a revised draft for Committee review.

M 3.11 Chair’s wrap-up and next steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the staff and Committee for all their dedicated work. The Committee discussed the key messages of the meeting, which included the deliverables of the meeting and the major themes from their discussions on barriers related to Assessment, Curriculum and Instruction and Digital Learning and Technology. The Committee plans to address organizational barriers and deferred recommendations at the next meeting on February 12, 2020.

K-12 education meeting 2: Tuesday November 12, 2019

Letter from chair to the minister

Date: December 3, 2019

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility
5^th Floor, 777 Bay Street,
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development Committee: Meeting 2– Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the Meeting (“Meeting 2”) held on November 12, 2019 and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

At the Meeting, the Committee discussed and approved the Meeting #1 Minutes and the K-12 SDC Work Plan. Two small working groups presented their work on addressing barriers to accessible education. One examined Attitudes, Behaviours, Perceptions and Assumptions; and the other looked at Awareness and Training. The Committee had productive, and thought-provoking discussions regarding these groups’ findings. From these successful discussions, the Committee unanimously passed 10 draft initial recommendations. Seven recommendations address the Attitudes, Behaviours, Perceptions and Assumptions barrier and three address the Awareness and Training barrier.

Looking ahead to the Committee’s third meeting, we will begin discussions on two new barriers as identified by the Committee: Assessment, Curriculum and Instruction; and Digital Learning and Technology.

I look forward to continuing to update you on the Committee’s ongoing progress.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting Information

Date: November 12, 2019

Location: Universal Boardroom, 6^th Floor, 777 Bay Street, Toronto, Ontario

Format of Committee Minutes and References: For the purposes of referencing Committee documents and items in the minutes: Meeting (M) represents the meeting number/minute items/sections/action items and ‘Partial’ represents limited attendance.

Present

Standards Development Committee Members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Doug Mein, Jane Ste. Marie, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan (Teleconference), Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk, Angelo Tocco, Lindy Zaretsky (Teleconference).

Non-voting Standards Development Committee Members: Claudine Munroe, Ministry of Education

Supporting Staff: (Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility) Michael Thomas, Susan Picarello, Mary Bartolomucci, Garth Napier (Partial), Alex Ibrahim, Sonya Del Monte, Paul Challen, Vinothini Kajendran, and Jenna Strathearn, (Ministry of Education) Venetta Miranda, David Moore.

Guests: (Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility) Deputy Minister, Denise Cole (Ontario Human Rights Commission) Jeff Poirier and (ARCH Disability Law Centre) Diane Wintermute

Captionist: Gemme Humenny

Interpreters: Carolyn Lesonsky, Gloria Brifoglio, Sharon Pardy

Attendants: Carolyn Loppie, Samira Kassem

Regrets: Ashleigh Molloy

Resigned: Adam Peer, Mary Linton, and Jean-Baptiste Arhanchiague

Meeting Minutes

M 2.1 Housekeeping and Logistical Information

Ministry staff provided information on emergency safety information for the meeting venue and logistical information for the day.

M 2.2 Chair’s Welcome and Review of Agenda

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo provided welcome remarks to the Committee, and provided an overview of the key deliverables for the meeting. The Chair reviewed the role of the Education Technical Sub Committee and the current status of their work. The Chair also provided the future meeting dates for the Committee: January 8, 2020, February 12, 2020, April 1, 2020, May 5, 2020 and May 6, 2020 (Half-day).

The goal of the meeting was for the Committee to approve the Meeting #1 Minutes, the Committee’s Workplan, as well as beginning to discuss and vote on initial recommendations for barrier areas 1 and 2 (see M 2.7 and M 2.8 below).

M 2.3 Welcome Remarks - Deputy Minister Denise Cole, Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility

Deputy Minister Denise Cole made welcome remarks to the Committee. The Deputy emphasized that the Minister is pleased that the Committee is resuming work and acknowledges that the Committee is eager to return back to work. The Deputy also indicated that she and the Minister look forward to receiving the Committee’s Initial Recommendations Report on addressing barriers in the K-12 sector within the next six months.

M 2.4 Meeting #1 Minutes and K-12 SDC Work Plan: Voting Item

The Chair led a discussion on the Meeting #1 Minutes. The Committee reviewed the minutes and the Chair opened the floor for voting. The Committee voted to approve the Meeting #1 minutes.

Motion 2.1: Carried - Meeting #1 Minutes

Unanimous approval from Committee members on the Meeting #1 Minutes.

The Committee held a discussion on K-12 SDC work plan. Members asked for confirmation that “other” areas outside of the identified barriers in the work plan can be considered. The Chair confirmed that there will be an opportunity to discuss other barrier areas outside of the Committee identified areas, if the Committee wishes to do so. The Committee voted to approve the K-12 SDC Work plan.

Motion 2.2: Carried – Work Plan

Unanimous approval from Committee members on the K-12 SDC Work Plan.

M 2.5 Welcome Remarks – Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility

Assistant Deputy Minister Susan Picarello, made introductory remarks to the Committee. ADM Picarello voiced her support of the Committee. She reminded members of the timelines and deliverables of the Committee’s work and noted that she is looking forward to the progress of the Committee.

M 2.6 Presentation from the Ontario Human Rights Commission and ARCH Disability Law Centre

Jeff Poirier, Senior Policy Advisor, made a presentation to the Committee on behalf of the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC). The presentation provided an overview of how the Ontario Human Rights Code aligns with the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA); highlighted past and current OHRC’s accessible education activities; and summarized the OHRC’s accessible education policy and recommendations.

Diane Wintermute, Staff Lawyer from ARCH Disability Law Centre, made a presentation to the Committee. The presentation provided information summarizing ARCH’s work in the area of accessible education; examined Article 24 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Access to Education; and highlighted additional barrier areas and issues ARCH has identified through systemic work in the education sector.

Following the presentation, members had the opportunity to ask questions and have a group discussion with both presenters.

The Chair thanked the presenters and highlighted how important it is for all parties in the education sector to collaborate and communicate because inclusion is different for everyone.

M 2.7 Barrier One: Attitudes, Behaviours, Perceptions and Assumptions – Small Group One Report

The Committee heard the report back from small group one that focused on barrier area one: Attitudes, Behaviours, Perceptions and Assumptions. Small group one presented their draft recommendations to the Committee for group discussion. Based on small group one’s draft recommendations, the Committee drafted and voted upon the following draft initial recommendations:

Motion 2.3 Carried – Barrier One: Recommendation #1

People with disabilities (students, educators, employees, etc.) should be directly involved in designing and reviewing policies, programs, curriculum, and so forth, as well as participating in speaking opportunities to students and educators at the school level, school board level, and ministry level, in K-12 Education.

The Ministry of Education should play a role in ensuring that students and professionals with disabilities are involved with provincial and system planning.

Vote Passed

Motion 2.4 Carried – Barrier One: Recommendation #2

It is imperative that we instruct and educate our teacher candidates and future teachers about inclusive, accessible, equitable education. Course delivery needs to include guest presenters living with disabilities. There should be a greater focus on hiring staff who live with disabilities. This action would speak to inclusion and equity for all, not just students with special education needs.

Vote Passed

Motion 2.5 Carried – Barrier One: Recommendation #3

Teachers need to be in-serviced in the philosophy of equity, accessibility and inclusion, so they are equipped to model inclusive behaviours and attitudes, and to ensure that students with disabilities are active participants. When differences are accepted as a part of life, they become the norm.

Vote Passed

Motion 2.6 Carried – Barrier One: Recommendation #4

Each school board should set up and maintain a network of teachers and other staff with disabilities, and a network of students with disabilities, to get input on accessibility issues at the school board.

Vote Passed

Motion 2.7 Carried – Barrier One: Recommendation #5

We recommend that each school board:

develop and implement a multi-year program/curriculum for educating students, school board staff and families of school board students, about accessibility, inclusion and full participation of students with disabilities, tailored to age levels. Where possible, this should include hearing from, meeting, and interacting with, people with disabilities.
communicate to all families of the school board's students, on the school board's commitment to accessibility, equity and inclusion of students with disabilities, and the benefits this brings to all students.

Vote Passed

Motion 2.8 Carried – Barrier One: Recommendation #6

We recommend that each school board:

Review, develop and implement human resources policies and practices to expand school board staff knowledge and skills regarding accessibility, equity and inclusion.
Make knowledge and experience on implementing inclusion an important hiring and promotions criterion especially for administrators, principals, vice-principals and all staff.
Ensure accessibility and inclusion knowledge and performance in any performance management and performance reviews.

Vote Passed

Motion 2.9 Carried – Barrier One: Recommendation #7

That the Province of Ontario develop a strategy to raise awareness and to change attitudes, behaviours, perceptions and assumptions, in partnership with the Government of Canada, which has recently passed the Accessible Canada Act.

Vote Passed

The Committee discussed other draft initial recommendations but decided to defer four recommendations for further discussion by small group 1, the Education Technical Sub Committee and the Committee.

M 2.8 Barrier Two: Awareness and Training – Small Group Two Report

The Committee heard the report back from small group two that focused on barrier area two: Awareness and Training. Small group two presented their draft recommendations to the Committee for group discussion. Based on small group two’s draft recommendations, the Committee drafted the following draft initial recommendations:

Motion 2.10 Carried – Barrier Two: Recommendation #1

We recommend: That a common Universal Design for Learning (UDL) training be mandatory for all educators (senior administration, school administration, teachers, occasional teachers, educational assistants, and Professional Support Staff Personnel members) both at the pre-service level and on-going throughout the school year. This training should not be delivered solely on-line but through a combination of on-line and in-person formats and should be developed in consultation with people who self-identify as having a disability.

Vote Passed

Motion 2.11 Carried – Barrier Two: Recommendation #2

We recommend: That the Government of Ontario develop and provide a model training module and template for AODA, Ontario Human Rights Code, and Charter of Rights awareness, with a goal of achieving a barrier-free education system. The training module should be developed in consultation with people who self-identify with disabilities and should not only focus on accommodating students but should take into consideration dealing with colleagues, parents, and community members who may require some accommodation. The training should include both on-line and in-person components with all materials being available in accessible formats.

Vote Passed

Motion 2.12 Carried – Barrier Two: Recommendation #3

We recommend: That school boards develop and deliver adaptive/assistive technology and services training programs at:

a general awareness level; and
more detailed modules for all staff who will need specific training not just special education teachers. This training on how to use, interact with, and support the use of adaptive/assistive technology and services training programs, should be provided at the school level and not on-line.

Vote Passed

M 2.9 Chair’s Wrap-up and Next Steps

The Chair provided closing remarks and thanked the Committee for all their hard work. Next, the Chair provided an overview of the Committees’ next steps. The most significant of these will be the Committee’s discussion barrier area three: ‘Assessment, Curriculum and Instruction’ and barrier area four ‘Digital Learning and Technology’ at meeting three.

K-12 education meeting 1: April 17-18, 2018

Letter from chair to the minister

Date: November 22, 2019

The Honourable Raymond Cho
Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility
5^th Floor, 777, Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Minister,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development: Meeting 1 – Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of the K-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee approved minutes from the Meeting (“Meeting 1”) held on April 17 and 18, 2018, and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress.

At the Meeting, the Committee held further discussions on identifying barriers to accessibility and collaborating on a shared vision for accessibility in education. Members noted their commitment to working towards an inclusive, student-centered new standard for accessibility in education.

Looking ahead to Meeting 2, the Committee will begin discussions on developing a work plan and drafting a proposed Long-Term Objective for a new accessibility standard for the K-12 education sector.

Sincerely,
(Original signed by)
Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting Information

Date: April 17-18, 2018

Location: King II Room, Hyatt Regency Hotel, 370 King Street West, Toronto

Present

Standards Development Committee Members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Jean-Baptiste Arhanchiague, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Doug Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Adam Peer (Partial), Ben Smith, Jane Ste. Marie, Angelo Tocco, Lindy Zaretsky

Non-voting Standards Development Committee Members: Julie Williams

Supporting Staff: (Accessibility Directorate of Ontario) Mary Bartolomucci, Nidhi Bhagat (Partial), Dalveer Birk, Elisheva Bouskila Fox, Kimberly Campos, Paul Challen, Ann Louise FitzPatrick, Ann Hoy, Keren Mack, Garth Napier (Partial), Phil Simeon, Meridith St. Pierre, Casey Teixeira , (Ministry of Education) Michele Babin, David Moore

Guests: (Office of the Ontario Child Advocate) J.P. Armani, Alexandra Bissell, Joshua Lamers, Rana Nasrazadani, Heather O’Shea, Alanna Stanley

Facilitator: Don Lenihan (Middle Ground Policy Research)

Captionist: Gemme Humenny

Interpreters: Carolyn Lesonsky, Gloria Brifoglio, Sheila Johnston

Attendants: Jayne Jalonikou, Gerald Ruiz-Alvarez

Regrets: Mary Linton, Jack Stadnyk

Resigned: Claude Deschamps

Day 1 meeting minutes

M 1.1 Chair’s welcome and logistical information: Day 1

The Chair, Lynn Ziraldo, provided welcoming remarks to the Committee and invited each member to introduce themselves. Casey Teixeira provided information on emergency safety information for the meeting venue and logistical information for the day.

M 1.2 Welcoming remarks – Minister of Education

The Honourable Indira Naidoo-Harris, Minister of Education, made welcoming remarks to the Committee. Minister Naidoo-Harris thanked the Chair and members for their contributions to making education more accessible in Ontario, and emphasized the importance of creating an inclusive education system where all students have the opportunity to learn.

M 1.3 In-camera discussion

The Committee held an in-camera session.

M 1.4 “We Have Something to Say”: Presentation by the Office of the Ontario Child Advocate

J.P. Armani, Alexandra Bissell, Joshua Lamers, and Rana Nasrazadani made a presentation to the Committee on behalf of the Office of the Ontario Child Advocate and the We Have Something To Say Youth Advisory Committee. The presentation outlined the importance of understanding the intersectional nature of disability barriers and the importance of centering the direct voice of students and youth in discussions related to education.

Following the presentation, members had the opportunity to review and discuss a case study exemplifying the range of barriers faced by students with disabilities.

The Chair thanked the presenters and emphasized the importance of hearing directly from students and youth with disabilities.

M 1.5 Identifying barriers

Don Lenihan led a facilitated discussion on identifying and categorizing barriers to accessibility, including small group discussions followed by a plenary discussion of the Committee as a whole. The Committee discussed barriers across eight broad categories:

Attitudinal Barriers
Curriculum Design
Digital / E-Learning / Accessible Technology
Physical and Architectural Barriers
“Outside the Classroom”
Organizational Barriers (Policies and Procedures)
Diversity of Disability
Awareness and Training

The Committee held a wide-ranging discussion on barriers facing students within these broad categories, as well as proposing alternative approaches to categorizing barriers. Some key points of discussion included:

the importance of considering curriculum design, instruction, and assessment as one continuous cycle. Members proposed reframing the “Curriculum Design” category as “assessment-informed curriculum and instruction.”
considerations related to accountability within schools and school boards, including a better understanding of funding allocations to and within school boards.
differing views on the role of attitudinal barriers and the potential impact of accessibility awareness training.
the importance of definitions and terminology that reflect the needs of all students with disabilities.
agreement that “Outside the Classroom” would be better divided into smaller categories addressing more specific issues such as social barriers and barriers related to transitions out of K-12 for students with disabilities.
additional potential categories of barriers, such as barriers related to transportation or barriers related to service animals.

The Committee agreed that further discussion on identifying and categorizing barriers would be required. A rolling draft of the Committee’s Priorities Report will be developed as the Committee continues its work and will reflect a broader range of categories and barriers identified by members to date.

M 1.6 Vision for accessible education – Defining a long-term objective

Ann Louise FitzPatrick provided a short presentation to the Committee, summarizing their submissions ahead of the meeting on their visions for an accessible, student-centered education system.

Following the presentation, the Chair led a discussion inviting members to share their views around a vision for accessibility in education. Some key themes that emerged during discussion included:

ensuring students and families have access to clear information about available programs and services, as well as a clear dispute resolution process if needed
recognizing that students do not learn in isolation but in relation to a broader community that includes families, teachers, administrators, and a wide range of support staff in school and out of school
working towards an educational system that supports students in meeting their personal educational goals and visions.

M 1.7 Chair’s wrap-up: Day 1

Lynn Ziraldo, Chair, led a discussion on key messages to summarize the day’s discussions, and adjourned Day 1 of the meeting.

Day 2 present

Standards Development Committee Members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Jean-Baptiste Arhanchiague, Mike Cyr, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Michelle Longlade, Sheila McWatters, Doug Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan, Adam Peer (Partial), Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk (Partial), Jane Ste. Marie, Angelo Tocco, Lindy Zaretsky

Non-voting Standards Development Committee Members: Julie Williams

Supporting Staff: (Accessibility Directorate of Ontario) Mary Bartolomucci, Nidhi Bhagat (Partial), Dalveer Birk, Elisheva Bouskila Fox, Kimberly Campos, Paul Challen, Ann Louise FitzPatrick, Ann Hoy, Keren Mack, Garth Napier (Partial), Phil Simeon, Meridith St. Pierre, Casey Teixeira, (Ministry of Education) Michele Babin, David Moore

Facilitator: Don Lenihan (Middle Ground Policy Research)

Captionist: Gemme Humenny

Interpreters: Carolyn Lesonsky, Gloria Brifoglio, Anna Lee

Attendants: Jayne Jalonikou, Gerald Ruiz-Alvarez

Regrets: Rita-Marie Hadley, Mary Linton

Resigned: Claude Deschamps

Day 2 meeting minutes

M 1.8 Chair’s welcome and updates: Day 2

The Chair welcomed all members for the second day of Meeting 1. The Chair advised members that no decision had been made yet on membership for a joint subcommittee with the Post-Secondary Education Standards Development Committee, and thanked all members who had expressed interest in participating.

The Chair informed members that Claude Deschamps had resigned from the Committee.

The Chair led a discussion on voting procedures for the Committee, noting that the Terms of Reference for all Standards Development Committees outline voting rules for Committee recommendations. A member moved that Committee decisions on approving minutes should be determined by a simple majority rule, rather than the 75% threshold required for formal Committee recommendations. The motion was seconded. A vote was held following the voting rules outlined in the Terms of Reference (75% majority required) and the motion did not pass.

Don Lenihan provided a brief overview for the Committee of how their initial deliverable of a Priorities Report, as identified in the Mandate Letter issued by the Minister Responsible for Accessibility, would be developed as a rolling draft. He noted that the Chair and Committee members would have opportunities between meetings to review and revise the draft report before it would be finalized in fall 2018.

A member asked for clarification on who would author the initial draft of the Priorities Report. The Committee was advised that the secretariat role of the Accessibility Directorate includes drafting reports for the Committee’s review and approval. The Chair confirmed for the Committee that the Priorities Report could reflect minority views as well as consensus recommendations.

M 1.8 Identifying barriers: Reviewing and discussion

Ann Louise FitzPatrick and Elisheva Bouskila Fox provided a brief presentation to the Committee summarizing their discussion from Day 1 of the meeting on identifying and categorizing barriers to accessibility.

Don Lenihan led a group discussion with the Chair and Committee on the barriers and categories discussed to date. Key points identified during discussion included:

considering direct feedback from youth about the importance of social inclusion and creating opportunities for inclusion and participation outside of school
a need for greater accessibility and disability awareness among school board administrators, and the potential role of training programs such as principals’ courses in this area
barriers created by capacity and resource challenges, particularly for northern and rural boards as well as Francophone boards
the need for programming to support transitions out of K-12 education, including life skills programming as well as co-ops or experiential education.

M 1.9 Accessibility standards: Discussion and presentation

Elisheva Bouskila Fox provided a presentation to the Committee on current accessibility standards established in regulation under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act.

The Accessibility Directorate advised the Committee that the Information and Communications Standards Development Committee has proposed to refer sections of the Information and Communications Standard related to educational institutions to the K-12 and Post-Secondary Education Standards Development Committees, for their review.

The Chair led a discussion with the Committee focused on addressing how current regulated standards apply to the K-12 education sector and identifying where there may be gaps or ongoing implementation challenges that could be addressed by a new accessibility standard.

The Committee also discussed how non-regulatory tools and resources could support implementation of improved accessibility in the K-12 sector.

M 1.10 K-12 Education sector: Question and answer session

Julie Williams, non-voting member and Acting Director of the Special Education/Success for All Branch of the Ministry of Education, held a question and answer session with the Committee on issues related to K-12 education in Ontario.

M 1.11 Chair’s updates

The Chair provided an update to the Committee on upcoming meeting dates. Ann Hoy, Assistant Deputy Minister of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Division, provided a brief overview for the Committee on the government’s caretaker role during the period leading up to the provincial election. A group photo was taken.

M 1.12 Defining priorities

Don Lenihan led a facilitated discussion on developing a shared definition of a “priority barrier”, including small group discussions followed by a plenary discussion of the Committee as a whole.

Some members expressed concern that the process of identifying priorities for a new standard, as requested in the Minister’s mandate letter to the Committee, could lead to the needs of some students being excluded from consideration. A concern was also expressed that further work on identifying barriers was required before discussions could be held on determining priorities. The Chair noted that this work would continue to evolve, and that the Committee would continue to work through the discussion of barriers during coming meetings and as the Priorities Report is developed.

The Committee discussed the possibility of prioritizing within a category of barriers rather than between the categories themselves (e.g., physical access to a school may be ranked as being more important than physical access to individual non-teaching spaces within a school).

Overall, all members emphasized the importance of working towards an accessibility standard that considers the needs of all students with disabilities, and reflects equity and intersectionality related to disability as core concepts.

Members also discussed opportunities to leverage existing resources to address barriers to accessibility, and opportunities to address recurring barriers or to recommend changes that would have broad positive impact across the educational system while also removing barriers for students with disabilities.

M 1.13 Chair’s wrap-up, key messages and next steps

The Chair closed the meeting and invited members to provide feedback to her and to the Accessibility Directorate to support planning for the next meeting. Members discussed key messages that each member may use to guide discussions with their networks or communities.

K-12 education meeting 0: February 5, 2018

Letter from chair to the minister

March 12, 2018

The Honourable Tracy MacCharles
Minister Responsible for Accessibility
Mowat Block 6^th Floor, 900 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario M7A 2E1

Dear Minister,

Re: K-12 Education Standards Development: Orientation Meeting – Minutes and Progress Report

On behalf of the members of theK-12 Education Standards Development Committee (the Committee), I am pleased to submit the Committee-approved minutes from the Orientation Meeting (“Meeting 0”) held on February 5, 2018, and to provide you with a brief update on the Committee’s progress. An amendment was adopted to incorporate additional detail into the minutes based on members’ feedback. A subsequent amendment brought forward by a member did not pass.

At the Orientation Meeting, the Committee discussed their mandate and the scope of their work, and began discussions on barriers to accessibility for students with disabilities in the K-12 sector. Members noted their appreciation for the time you devoted to meeting with the Committee, as well as their recognition of the close partnership between the Accessibility Directorate and the Ministry of Education in support of their work.

Looking ahead to Meeting 1, the Committee will continue initial discussions on barriers to accessibility and start to consider how to organize and prioritize our work over the coming months.

The Orientation Meeting was a positive and successful launch to our work as a Committee, and I look forward to working with the members and with our partner Committee for Post-Secondary Education over the course of our mandate.

Sincerely,

(Original signed by)

Lynn Ziraldo,
Chair, K-12 Education Standards Development Committee

Meeting Information

Date: February 5, 2018

Location: King 1 Room, Hyatt Regency Hotel, 370 King Street West, Toronto

Format of Committee Minutes and References: For the purposes of referencing Committee documents and items in the minutes: ‘M’ (Meeting) represents the meeting number/minute items/sections/action items and ‘Partial’ represents limited attendance.

Present

Standards Development Committee Members: Lynn Ziraldo (Chair), Stephen Andrews, Jean-Baptiste Arhanchiague, Mike Cyr, Claude Deschamps, Donna Edwards, Jon Greenaway, Rita-Marie Hadley, Wendy Lau, David Lepofsky, Mary Linton, Sheila McWatters, Doug Mein, Ashleigh Molloy, Alison Morse, Rana Nasrazadani, Victoria Nolan (partial), Adam Peer, Ben Smith, Jack Stadnyk, Jane Ste. Marie, Angelo Tocco, Lindy Zaretsky

Non-voting Standards Development Committee Members: Shirley Kendrick

Supporting Staff: (Accessibility Directorate of Ontario) Mary Bartolomucci, Nidhi Bhagat, Dalveer Birk, Elisheva Bouskila Fox, Kimberly Campos, Paul Challen, Ann Louise FitzPatrick, Ann Hoy, Keren Mack, Ryan Nichols, Phil Simeon, Meridith St. Pierre, Casey Teixeira (Ministry of Education) Michele Babin, David Moore

Guests: Minister Tracy MacCharles, Deputy Minister Marie-Lison Fougère, Deputy Minister Bruce Rodrigues, Assistant Deputy Minister Martyn Beckett, Ed Steel (Director of Policy for the Office of Minister MacCharles)

Facilitator: Don Lenihan (Middle Ground Policy Research)

Interpreters: Gloria Brifoglio, Sheila Johnston, Anna Lee

Captionist: Gemme Humenny

Attendants: Jayne Jalonikou, Gerald Ruiz-Alvarez

Regrets: Michelle Longlade

Meeting Minutes

M 0.1 Chair’s Welcome and Logistical Information

The Chair provided welcoming remarks to the Committee and outlined the agenda for the day.

Casey Teixeira provided information on emergency safety information for the meeting venue and logistical information for the day.

M 0.2 Assistant Deputy Minister Remarks

Ann Hoy, Assistant Deputy Minister of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Division, welcomed the members of the K-12 Standards Development Committee and spoke about the potential impact of a new accessibility standard for education, benefiting students throughout the educational system and supporting the families, educators, and administrators that work with them.

Ann also informed the committee that ADO staff would be available throughout the day to provide any additional support that members would require.

M 0.3 Chair’s Welcome and Introductions

The Chair welcomed the members and invited each member to introduce themselves briefly.

Staff from the Accessibility Directorate and Ministry of Education (EDU) supporting the meeting introduced themselves to members, together with the captionist, interpreters, and personal attendants supporting members.

The Chair introduced Don Lenihan from Middle Ground Policy Research, who is facilitating both education SDC meetings over the course of their initial work.

M 0.4 Mandate and Guiding Principles Overview

The Chair provided the Committee with an overview of the mandate letter issued to her by Minister Tracy MacCharles and of the guiding principles that should inform their work. She advised members that the mandate would be made public on the Accessibility Directorate’s website following the meeting (web link).

The Chair advised members that a joint subcommittee would be established in partnership with the Post-Secondary Education Standards Development Committee, and indicated that members interested in participating should inform her of their interest. The role of the joint subcommittee is to share information across the two Committees and to provide advice on transition planning and other areas of commonality and alignment.

Members discussed the scope of their work and asked a number of questions about the Standards Development Committee process and the timelines identified for their work. The Chair welcomed members to bring forward research on leading practices from other jurisdictions.

The Committee discussed sharing information regarding Committee work back to their organizations and stakeholder networks. The Committee will further discuss this process at a future meeting to ensure a consistent process for sharing information externally. The Chair welcomed members to contact her with any questions.

The Chair confirmed that members are free to share publicly those meeting materials that have been indicated as appropriate for sharing.

Committee members were asked to provide the Directorate with their availability for an April meeting.

M 0.5 Overview of Expenses

The Committee was provided with a brief overview of the expenses and claims process, in keeping with the Travel, Meal and Hospitality Directive. Members were reminded that original receipts are required in order to support all claims, with the exception of meals. Per diems are a reportable income and members will be issued a T4A to reflect these earnings.

Members were encouraged to contact the Accessibility Directorate with any questions regarding expenses.

M 0.6 Working Together: Collaborating on Standards Development

Don Lenihan led a discussion of group norms that would govern the work of Committee members. Members discussed their role as Committee members in developing recommendations collaboratively.

Members agreed in principle to the following overarching group norms to guide their discussions:

Find choices that are win/win
Mutual Respect
Openness and Flexibility
Evidence-Based Approach
Shared Ownership of the Process and Results

Members discussed guidelines around transparency, confidentiality and information-sharing in between meetings. The Committee agreed to continue discussions going forward.

Members also discussed the quorum and voting rules set by the Terms of Reference for all Standards Development Committees.

M 0.7 Chair’s Wrap-Up: Committee Norms and Decision-Making

The Chair summarized the morning discussion on group norms, and emphasized the importance of mutual respect and trust among Committee members. The Chair invited members to provide further feedback on group norms following the meeting and confirmed that further discussions will take place regarding group norms and confidentiality.

Members were advised that in cases where they were uncertain about what information or materials could be shared publicly, the Chair could provide guidance. Key messages will be developed by the Committee and shared following each meeting to support members in communicating with their networks.

M 0.8 Minister’s Remarks

The Honourable Tracy MacCharles, Minister Responsible for Accessibility, welcomed the Committee to their roles and thanked them for their commitment.

Members had the opportunity for a dialogue with the Minister and discussed the importance of a close collaboration with the Ministry of Education and with their partner committee for Post-Secondary Education.

Members also discussed the issue of transitioning to employment for students with disabilities. The Minister provided information to the Committee on AccessTalent, Ontario’s strategy to help people with disabilities find employment.

M 0.9 2017 Accessibility Survey – Results in Context

Ann Louise FitzPatrick and Elisheva Bouskila Fox provided a presentation to the Committee about an online survey conducted from May-October 2017, intended to gather public feedback on barriers to accessibility in K-12 and post-secondary education.

Further discussion with members following the presentation included questions about additional analysis required and the role of the survey as a springboard for Committee discussion. Members also discussed the special education planning process in K-12 school boards.

M 0.10 Identifying and Defining Barriers

Don Lenihan facilitated a discussion on survey themes and barriers to accessibility, and separated the Committee into small groups for further discussions. Following the breakout groups, members held a group discussion to share their initial views on barriers to accessibility for students in the K-12 education sector.

The facilitator clarified that the five themes included in the online survey and presented by the Accessibiluty Directorate are a start point only, intended to assist the Committee in their thinking about the identification of barriers. The Chair reiternated that the Committee will be establishing their priority areas with this feedback in mind.

Members suggested a number of additional barriers, including digital accessibility, experiential learning, clear information and resources to guide parents and educators, and consistent implementation of accessibility requirements.

Members agreed that additional discussion on a broad range of accessibility barriers and priority areas would be required.

M 0.11 Chair’s Wrap-Up, Key Messages, and Next Steps.

The Chair reiterated that the Committee has a great opportunity to make recommendations that will remove barriers for students with disabilities throughout their journey through Ontario’s publicly-funded education system.

Updated: April 22, 2022

Published: March 04, 2021