Autism Society New Brunswick 2005 Submission to the MacKay Inclusive Education NB Review

May 24, 2005

  

AWM Legal Consulting Inc.
7071 Bayers Road R.P.O. box 22076
Halifax,  Nova Scotia  B3L 4T7 

To Whom It May Concern:

The following  is Autism Society of New Brunswick’s submission to the Inclusive Education: A Review of Programming and Services in New Brunswick committee.

  

Thank you,

Luigi Rocca

President, ASNB

            

“If a child cannot learn in the way we teach, then we must teach in the way he can learn.”  Ivar Lovaas.

Autism presents one of the biggest challenges to the New Brunswick Government’s inclusion policies.  According to the Department of Education’s own numbers, there are no less than 1,000 students in the public school system with Autism Spectrum Disorder.  In the majority of cases, these students are not receiving a meaningful education.  

What Inclusion means to Autism Society of New Brunswick

Inclusion is a philosophy, not a methodology.

-          Inclusion should provide autistic school children access to a REAL education in a positive learning environment which may be inside or outside the classroom, or a combination of both, depending on the individual circumstances of the student with autism with the support of an individually assigned and dedicated Teacher Assistant (TA) formally trained in Applied Behavioural Analysis (ABA) methodologies.

-          Inclusion is more than simply including students with an Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) physically in the classroom.

-          “The philosophy of “full inclusion” is that students with special needs can and should be educated in the same settings as their normally developing peers with appropriate support services rather than being placed in special education classrooms or schools.”  Medical School, University of North Carolina.

Although the goals and values underlying full inclusion are laudable, neither research nor thoughtful analysis of the nature of supports concurs.  There is very little empirical evidence to support the above definition of full inclusion as it relates to students with autism.

-          Numerous studies clearly show students with an ASD cannot learn in a typical classroom environment.  Students with an ASD learn in a one-to-one setting, exclusive of the classroom.

-          Students with an ASD who have no supports will not learn.  If students with an ASD have supports such as formally trained TA’s in ABA methodology, reinforcers, trials, rewards, visuals, etc., learning occurs.

-          ASD, by its very nature, manifests itself differently with each student.  Therefore, flexibility is absolutely crucial with respect to classroom inclusion.  Some students with an ASD, particularly lower functioning students learn better in a quieter setting outside the classroom while some can learn in a room with their peers; most will benefit from a judicious mix of the two settings.  It is imperative that each student be properly assessed by trained individuals so that a proper and individualized learning environment can be designed for each student.

-          Many students with an ASD will be following a completely distinct curriculum.

-          It is critical to take into account the needs and characteristics of the individual student with autism and apply flexible inclusion policies so as to ensure the highest quality education and development.

What Do We Need

-          Ideally, parents of students with an ASD would benefit most by having teachers trained in ABA methodologies to teach their children on a one-on-one basis.  We realize that with the one-to-one methods required for most autistic students, it would be unrealistic to expect this of the public school system.

-          In general, New Brunswick has some of the highest quality teachers anywhere.  They are, however, sorely lacking in the training and knowledge necessary to plan and implement effective strategies for students with an ASD.

-          The Department of Education does not provide the proper training in ABA to work one-to-one with ASD students.  Faced with this reality, parents have asked for dedicated, individually assigned TA’s trained in ABA.

The Department of Education, the Teachers Union, and CUPE Union representing TA’s have to understand this reality, and adjust their collective agreements to reflect it.  It is imperative that no student be denied a meaningful education due to union or collective agreement issues.  Unfortunately, this often what happens so it is critical that the current mindset be changed.

-          Parents are frustrated and angry at the Department of Education policy on TA assignment, as the TA is for the teacher not the individual student.  Also, TA’s changing on a regular basis from year to year, multiple TA assignments to a student with autism throughout the school day, no guarantee that a TA trained in ABA methodologies will be assigned to an ASD student.

-          The TA Union needs a special designation of TA’s with ABA training to be matched with students   with an ASD.  Currently TA’s with special training in tube feeding or catherization are matched to students with this type of need and the same standard needs to apply with ABA training of TA’s.

-          The members of the Unions should have their rights but they should also be part of a regime which reflects more expressly the need to protect students with autism who are sometimes hurt by job competition process and work jurisdiction disputes between the Teacher and TA unions.

-          Faculties of Education need more learning in Special Education given the number of special needs students.  Universities should be offering degrees in Special Education.

-          To achieve inclusion for students with an ASD proper support is needed in the form of TA’s who can work one-to-one with students with autism, and who are formally trained in ABA methodology, which has been proven effective in educating students with autism.

 A Service Delivery Model 

        -   In New Brunswick ABA Training is available through the College of              Extended Learning: Autism Intervention Training.  The Department of Education to date has not seen fit to provide this training to its TA’s and Methods & Resource Teachers (M&R).  Yet, it is this very training which would squarely meet requirements to teach students with an ASD.

-          The Autism Support Worker (ASW) course offered through the College of Extended Learning is exactly what is needed for TA’s who work in the school system with students with autism.  It would be purely arbitrary to fail to provide the necessary training, or to provide less adequate training to the TA’s who work with students with an ASD in the more challenging school environment.

-          The Clinical Supervisor (CS) training offered through the College of Extended Learning is exactly what is needed for the Resource & Methods teachers.  These ABA trained teachers would be qualified to develop and monitor ABA programs designed specifically to each individual student with autism.  The ASW trained TA will be under the supervision of the trained M&R teacher, to implement the ABA programs with the individual student with autism.

-          Speech Pathology, Occupational Therapy, and Physiotherapy services are offered to students through the Extra Mural Program.  The input from these professionals, which is often required for the student with autism, can be incorporated into the individual ASD students ABA program by the CS trained M&R teacher, followed by the ASW trained TA to implement.

-          The teaching of life skills, especially in the Middle and High School levels; need to be incorporated into the autistic students education program.

-          A specific outline of transition protocols for transitioning from Elementary to Middle School, and Middle School to High School, based on the individual autistic student’s needs.

What Are the Systemic Barriers to Having Inclusion

Again…. Inclusion is a philosophy not a methodology.

-          A teacher cannot instruct an entire class and still provide the level of one-to-one instruction required by a student with an ASD.

-          Inconsistency and misinterpretations of the learning needs of students with an ASD at the Department of Education level, School District level, and School level.

-          Collective agreements between the NBTA and CUPE representing TA’s, do not address the interests of students with an ASD, and some procedures and rights within the contracts can be detrimental to the education of students with an ASD.  Two examples are work jurisdiction and seniority rights.

-          Long wait times for students with an ASD to access Occupational and/or Speech Therapy are not the exception, they are the norm.  Once recommendations are made, it is common for the recommendations NOT to be implemented.  School Administrations, teachers, and M&R teachers do not appreciate the “how” and “why” to implement these recommendations.

-          Organization of Team meetings often falls on the shoulder of the parents.

-          Schools have denied parents requests to have the Department of Education’s Autism Consultant involved.

-          The Department of Education’s required document of the SEP/IEP is not meaningful.  The goals are often vague, not clearly defined, and not a working document.  It is developed and utilized in a variety of ways throughout the province.  Often viewed by parents as a waste of time to incorporate.

-          Educators often label behaviors incorrectly i.e.: bold and rude, when in fact the behavior is communication impairment.  For example, we know of one high functioning student with an ASD who forced himself to vomit in order to have himself removed from the classroom which was causing him great anxiety.  This behaviour is often interpreted as “bad” when in fact from the student’s perspective, it is very rational.  In time, what is considered a normal environment for most students becomes torture for a student with an ASD and they will do whatever is necessary to stop it.  Any rational person would do the same thing.

-          Teachers and School Administration often inadvertently reward negative behavior of students with an ASD.  Thus increasing the negative behavior leading to student frustration, and at times, suspension.  Suspension is a consequence a student with an ASD might not have any ability to understand, thus leading to more complications for the student to receive a REAL education.  In addition, what is perceived by the teacher as a “punishment”, can actually be a “reward” for the autistic student because it removes him/her from the classroom.

Propose Alternative Methods of Delivery

-          The Department of Education needs to endorse having more than one Autism Consultant for the entire province.  One Autism Consultant is inadequate to serve a population of more than 1000 students.

-          Training of TA’s as ASW’s, and training of M&R teachers as CS’s through the College of Extended Learning: Autism Intervention Training.

Accountability Measures

-          The Department of Education fully endorse ABA, providing formal training to TA’s and M&R teachers.

-          Develop a legal and workable education tool to replace the SEP/IEP.

-          ABA was endorsed recently in the Department of Education’s Teaching Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder document.  However, the document is woefully inadequate on specifics of formal training and implementation of ABA methodologies.

-          ABA is endorsed by a wide variety of very credible institutions and research organizations.

-          Court cases have clearly outlined ABA as the only proven method for treating and teaching children with autism, and the child’s constitutional right to have it provided.

Auton, BC 2000

Deal, Tennessee 2001

Wynberg, Ontario 2005

Survey Results

Autism Society New Brunswick conducted a survey with parents of students with an ASD to get their views on the current system.  In the interest of brevity, we are not including the full results.  We can, however, summarize the views of parents in two words: frustration and despair.  The vast majority of parents, particularly those of low functioning ASD students, believe that the current inclusion policies are failing their children.  We will provide the details of the survey at your request.

Funding Model

One suggestion would be that the Province of New Brunswick acting through the Department of Education   ensure funding to ensure that TA’s are properly trained in ABA  and available to each student in the province that needs them, regardless of which school district they are located in. 

It should not be left to the individual school districts, and whatever funding model that is adopted should ensure this goal is met.

Final Comments

-          Until the Department of Education commits to ABA training of TA’s and M&R teachers, the outcome for quality education and more importantly a quality of life during the school years will continue to be bleak and discouraging.

-          Do not let students with an ASD currently in New Brunswick schools become a generation lost to bureaucratic inertia or lack of will.

We ask that the Department of Education formally train TA’s in ABA methodologies, who work with our autistic children.

Read more »

What Do NB Teachers Really Think About The Porter-NBACL Full Inclusion Model?

What do New Brunswick teachers really think about the full inclusion model  which has been pushed relentlessly in NB schools by Gordon Porter and the New Brunswick Association for Community Living since the mid-1980's? The truth is many teachers recognize that extreme, everyone in the regular classroom inclusion does not work.  Teachers know this but they are afraid, for good reason, to speak up while they remain employed in New Brunswick schools. Speaking up and openly criticizing  the Inclusion Illusion would be detrimental to their careers and livelihoods and they know it.

Full inclusion, as defined by Gordon Porter, means "everyone in the mainstream classroom" as Mr. Porter preached to a Newfoundland audience a few weeks ago:


"Porter’s session revolved around the theme of parents and teachers working together to make inclusion work.“It means kids go to their neighbourhood schools with kids their own age in regular classes,” said Porter.“If you’re seven years old you go to the school just down the street. You go in a class with other seven-year-olds, and you’re supported if you have extra needs. “It’s so simple, it’s that simple,” said Porter."

I am a supporter of flexible inclusion and I am a critic and opponent of the full inclusion, everyone in the mainstream classroom inclusion, of Gordon Porter and his followers with the NBACL.  This father of a son with Autistic Disorder, and profound developmental delays learned long ago that Mr. Porter's  regular classroom is not appropriate for my son's learning requirements. It caused him harm and resulted in self injurious behavior repeated, severe biting of his hands and wrists. Today he is very well accommodated by a flexible inclusion which sees him receive his instruction in a quiet area outside the regular classroom.  He starts his day, has lunch, and has friends in a resource center in his high school with other students with challenges, challenges which Gordon Porter's full inclusion model would not accommodate.  He attends many events with his group from the resource centre and he loves, he absolutely loves going to school.

On my son's behalf and as a representative of the Autism Society New Brunswick I participated in the MacKay and Ministerial Inclusion reviews.  During these proceedings I was approached by teachers who thanked me for speaking out for a flexible model of inclusion.  Some children with an Autism Spectrum Disorder can function in the regular classroom, some can not.  Teachers can see that in their daily work, in respect of autistic students and others with severe challenges. Teachers though,  like most employees, know which way the wind blows where they work.  They know that if they preach the full inclusion gospel according to Gordon Porter they will be viewed favorably by the higher ups in the education department and the de facto education department ... the New Brunswick Association of Community Living. They know that if they publicly criticize full inclusion their careers could suffer. 


My experience during the inclusion review proceedings has been replicated after I have spoken publicly on television and radio.  I have been approached by many teachers who told me that they and their colleagues support my efforts in speaking up about the shortcomings of full (extreme)  inclusion. I have been encouraged by many teachers to continue critiquing the full inclusion model which governs the mindset of those who determine how our children will be educated.


I don't expect anyone in the office of the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development or at the "bricks and mortar" building of his colleagues at the NBACL to believe what I have stated.  They do not accept actual direct evidence that conflicts with their full inclusion model and they will certainly not accept my hearsay evidence based on undisclosed witnesses to what actually happens in our regular "inclusive" classrooms. The full inclusion true believers simply ignore such evidence and blame problems on the students themselves or argue that more resources are needed in the classroom under the guidance of classroom teachers.  Then everything will work smoothly.  


The full inclusion model of Porter and the NBACL is not an evidence based approach to education.  It is at best a  feel good philosophy.  At worst it is an illusion.  The full inclusion illusion.  One that can literally cause harm, mental, emotional, even physical harm, to some children for whom it is not an appropriate learning environment. This father of a son with severe challenges knows it.  The teachers who work on the front lines educating our children also know it.


The attached document is the 2005 report of an executive committee of the New Brunswick Teachers' Association which describes New Brunswick schools as being in a state of crisis.  The NBTA's report talks about the classroom composition concerns expressed by the teachers they represent but denies that the issue is classroom composition; the issue for the Association is the need for more support in the classroom.   If you look under the politically correct tap dancing of the NBTA's report though there is an honest recognition in many of the statements of its' members that classroom composition is in fact the issue.  I have posted the 5 page summary of the committee's recommendations following my comments in case the document is removed from the NBTA web site in future.

Read more »

Alward Transition Team Member Gordon Porter's Policies Harmed & Discriminated Against NB Children With Autism

"You people should be thankful for what you have"

The preceding statement was made by David Alward transition team member  Gordon Porter an Order of Canada recipient, former chair of the NB Human Rights Commission and godfather of New Brunswick's extremist "everyone must be educated in  the mainstream classroom" model of inclusive education, speaking to Autism Society New Brunswick representatives Dawn Bowie, a registered nurse, and mother of a son with autism and me, Harold Doherty a lawyer and father of a son with autism during the Wayne MacKay inclusive education review several years ago.  Mr. Porter was visibly angry with me, and with autism rep Dawn Bowie during a session of the review where we tried to inform him, and others present, that parental experience and research did not support his vision that all children benefit from mainstream classroom inclusion as a place of instruction.  He was upset that we were questioning the  extreme inclusive education model that he introduced in New Brunswick schools decades earlier and he dismissed anything we had to say.  He was contemptuous of our experience, our knowledge and any contribution we had to make. He did not want to hear that his extreme everyone in the mainstream classroom model is not appropriate for all autistic children. Dr. Goron Porter dismissed our contributions with the words "you people should be thankful for what you have".

We tried to tell Gordon Porter, and others during the MacKay  review,  about different ways of learning and different methods of teaching autistic children than those employed in the mainstream classroom. We tried to tell him that autism is a spectrum disorder, that some children with autism will in fact thrive in the mainstream classroom, others can benefit from the mainstream classroom for parts of their day and that for others the mainstream classroom is not appropriate at all and can even cause harm.  Gordon Porter .... and  Jody Carr's wife Krista Carr  ... who was present during the review as  a disability representative did not want to hear what we had to  say.

I tried to tell Gordon Porter, Krista Carr, and other mainstream classroom extremists, about my son's experience with the mainstream classroom for his first year of school when he would come home every day with self inflicted bite marks on his hands and wrists, that the biting occurred as a result of Conor being ovewhelmed by the mainstream classroom environment by the instruction he did not understand. I tried to tell them that the biting was reduced dramatically, almost entirely, when Conor was removed to a separate so called segregated area of the school for his instruction joining other students in common areas when appropriate for  Conor

 Mr. Porter introduced in New Brunswick's education system  an extreme version of inclusive education which insists that ALL children must receive their education in the mainstream classroom with their chronological peers.  It is based on the philosophical belief that all children regardless of ability or disability benefit from placement in the mainstream classroom.  It is NOT an evidence based approach to educating children with autism disorders.  The Gordon Porter Everyone in the Mainstream Classroom model of inclusive education does not work pure and simple. It has nothing to do with the realities of a child's abilities or challenges.  It is simply the faith of one man, Gordon Porter, and his cult like following which includes Jody Carr, Krista Carrr and Jack Carr. 

Gordon Porter's extremist mainstream classroom vision of inclusive education does not recognize the specific challenges faced by some children with disabilities, including some children with autism disorders. When Gordon Porter began, decades ago,  imposing his vision on NB schools autism was not known to the world at large.  While autism was known by some researchers as far back as Kanner in 1943 and was mentioned in the DSM II it was not identified in the DSM, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual used by psychiatrists in North America, until the DSM III in 1980 well after the Gordon Porter Era had begun in NB.   

Dr. Gordon Porter knows nothing at all about autism disorders or the various challenges faced by many autistic children in a school environment.  During the MacKay Inclusive education review he did not want to learn either.  He did not want me or Dawn Bowie to speak about autism because we were also pointing out that his sacred cow, his extremist vision of inclusive mainstream classroom education did not work for those who were in dire need of assistance. Dr. Gordon Porter who has received awards from around the world did not want to hear evidence from people, Dawn Bowie and Harold Doherty, who knew much better than he, that his vision has actually harmed some autistic children, some of whom are sent home after his model fails them. So the very distinguished Dr. Gordon Porter, like his disciples Krista Carr, Jody Carr and Jack Carr, simply dismissed us and told us that "you people" should be thankful for what you have.

David Alward's Conservative platform in the recent election campaign was written be a committee chaired by Gordon Porter disciple Jody Carr who will be named as a cabinet minister, probably in Education or Social Development, in the Alward government.  Mr. Alward's embrace of Gordon Porter and his extreme inclusion model of mainstream classroom inclusion for all is a very ominous but clear sign that dark days are ahead for the children with autism who have made made much progress recently in NB schools.

Following is a comment I wrote on this blog 3 years ago about Gordon Porter and the discriminatory aspects of his extremist, non-accommodating vision of inclusive education:  

Tuesday, October 16, 2007

New Brunswick Human Rights Commission Guidelines Discriminate Against Autistic Students

The New Brunswick Human Rights Commision has adopted new guidelines to accommodating students with a disability in New Brunswick schools - New Brunswick Human Rights Commission, Guideline on Accommodating Students with a Disability. Unfortunately for some New Brunswick students with Autism Disorder the guidelines themselves fail to accommodate their disability and in doing so discriminate against some students with profound Autism Disorder. The guidelines fail to accommodate by creating a "norm" or presumption in favor of mainstream classroom placement even though, for some autistic students, the mainstream classroom in not an appropriate place of learning, can be overwhelming to environmentally sensitive autistic children and can be result in dangerous, self injurious behavior.


When the NB Human Rights Commission says that mainstream classroom placement is the norm education officials will quite understandably feel that it is necessary to place all children in the classroom. Essentially this "norm" will push students into the classroom who should be in a different, quieter, less busy location within the school in order for them to learn, and to not be overwhelmed. For those school districts who do not want to spend the money from their budget to accommodate more individualized instruction necessary for some autistic students placing them in the classroom without individualized instruction by autism specific trained Teacher Aides will be a cheap solution, as it has been in the past. And the presumption or norm created by the HRC will assist them in justifying their decision.


New Brunswick schools have, over the past 30 years, been dominated by an extreme inclusion model which saw all children dumped in the mainstream classroom without proper support and without regard for the individual conditions of some children with disabilities such as some severely autistic children. The result has been disruption in the classroom, failure to learn by some children, and in some cases, including my profoundly autistic son, dangerously self injurious behavior. Fortunately, over the past several years, the rigid ideological approach of the classroom inclusion for all philosophy has given way in some instances to an evidence based approach which requires examination of what actually works for each child. Educate the child in the way he or she learns best, in the environment in which he or she learns best. An evidence based approach is consistent with human rights policies by requiring an examination of the disability issues presented by the individual student. This evidence based approach was promised by the Province of New Brunswick Inter-Departmental Committee that examined autism services in New Brunswick between 1999 and 2001.


The IDC Report issued in November 2001, disclosed the already known fact that there were at that time very few autism specific services available in New Brunswick. The most significant accomplishment of the IDC Report was that it recommended an evidence based approach to provision of autism services. The three departments that sat on the IDC were Health, Family Services and .... Education. In fact, since that time there have been some to an evidence based approach being adopted in some New Brunswick schools.


My own son, profoundly autistic, was removed from the mainstream classroom, at our request, after he repeatedly came home from school with self inflicted bite marks on his hands and wrists. He was overwhelmed by the classroom. To the full credit of school, district, and Department officials they looked at the evidence and agreed to place Conor in a separate room for his instruction for most of the day. The education officials accommodated my son's disability by looking at his actual condition and educating him in an environment suitable for him in light of the realities of his autism disorder.


During the MacKay Review of Inclusive Education Autism Society NB presented a position paper for educating autistic students which called for an evidence based approach. Teaching children how and where they learn best in light of their actual condition. As one of the autism representatives I spoke on numerous occasions about the need for an evidence based approach for autistic students. For some autistic students the mainstream classroom is the appropriate learning environment. For others, including my son, it is not. This evidence based approach is supported by research including Mesibov and Shea (1996):


The concept of full inclusion is that students with special needs can and should be educated in the same settings as their normally developing peers with appropriate support services, rather than being placed in special education classrooms or schools. According to advocates the benefits of full inclusion are increased expectations by teachers, behavioral modeling of normally developing peers, more learning, and greater selfesteem. Although the notion of full inclusion has appeal, especially for parents concerned about their children's rights, there is very little empirical evidence for this approach, especially as it relates to children with autism. This manuscript addresses the literature on full inclusion and its applicability for students with autism. Although the goals and values underlying full inclusion are laudable, neither the research literature nor thoughtful analysis of the nature of autism supports elimination of smaller, highly structured learning environments for some students with autism.


This information was present throughout the Mackay Inclusion review process. In one session I attempted, along with ASNB Education Rep Dawn Bowie, to speak specifically about autism issues and the need for an evidence based approach by which autistic students are educated in a location, whether it be in the mainstream classroom or elsewhere, according to the realities of their individual conditions. My comments were met dismissively by a New Maryland school official who asserted that we were not there to talk about autism. They were also met with angry opposition by New Brunswick Human Rights Commission Chair Gordon Porter who was present and who told me and Mrs. Bowie that "you people should be thankful for what you have ". Mr. Porter then proceeded to talk about how bad it was in the Special Education system in New Brunswick many years ago and how the inclusion model was a very substantial improvement.


Given Mr. Porter's prominent role in putting the inclusion model in place in New Brunswick, and given his strong personal views, it is not surprising that the Human Rights Commission which he chairs has issued Guidelines which create a presumption in favor of classroom inclusion for all students. It is also not surprising in that the New Brunswick Association for Community Living was tasked by the Department of Education with holding professional development days for New Brunswick teachers to explain the recommendations of the MacKay Inclusion Review. The NBACL is a fierce advocate for the total inclusion model. The NBACL has paid staff who persistently lobby for the full inclusion model. An example are the awards they hand out to teachers in New Brunswick who best demonstrate inclusion practices in New Brunswick schools. The NBACL, in hosting the inclusion professional development days for teachers asked Gordon Porter to be the keynote speaker at the event. A request by ASNB to speak at the event, to speak with the teachers about autism, and the need for an evidence based approach, was rejected by the NBACL.


Mr. Porter and NBACL are both strongly committed to the full inclusion model and that commitment to a philosophy of classroom inclusion for all is reflected in the norm espoused by the new Human Rights Commission guidelines. The promotion of that norm by the Human Rights Commission will put even more pressure on teachers and school officials to put all students in the classroom. The promotion of that norm is contrary to the evidence based approach promised for autistic persons in the IDC Report and it is contrary to the duty to accommodate the individual differences of students with disabilities, particularly some students with profound autism disorder.


It was precisely that failure to accommodate individuals with disabilities that led Yude Henteleff QC to describe the full inclusion model as discriminatory in a paper he presented to the Canadian Assocation for Community Living in 2004. Mr. Henteleff has represented individuals with a variety of different disabilities including autism, deaf and hard of hearing,
aspergers, Tourette's syndrome, attention deficit hyperactivity disorders, developmental
disability, physical disability and the learning disabled. He has been the legal counsel for the Association of Parents of Children with Autism in Manitoba and has been associated with the Learning Disabilities Association of Canada. In The Fully Inclusive Classroom Is Only One Of The Right Ways To Meet The Best Interests Of The Special Needs Child Mr. Henteleff argued that the full inclusion approach is in itself discriminatory by failing to accommodate individual disability based differences. At page 2 he states:


It should be abundantly clear, having in mind the foregoing statistics, that for children
who suffer from emotional, mental, behavioural, cognitive, sensory, physical, expressive
language, visual and auditory difficulties (and often a combination of some of the foregoing), it is simply not possible to meet their diverse needs in one environment. One shoe simply cannot fit all.


Indeed, total inclusion is a discriminatory concept because it limits the environmental choices, which groups of children and youth with differing difficulties have the right to make in their best interests.


I am completely dedicated to the public school system. I believe it is an integral part of
whom and what we are as Canadians living in a democratic society. That means a place where all children are welcomed - regardless of their gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, colour, religion, physical or mental condition. In other words, the public school system is a place where the social contract guaranteed by the Charter and Human Rights Codes is fulfilled. That social contract is that every individual is entitled to equality and to be free from discrimination.

However, schools being a welcoming place regardless of gender, ethnicity, colour, religion, physical or mental condition, namely inclusivity, is far different from what is described as "full inclusion" in the general classroom. Full inclusion falls far short of guaranteeing equality.

Mr. Porter, the Commission, and the NBACL which all advocate for full inclusion will argue that establishing a norm does not mean that all children must be kept in the classroom at all times and that their disabilities are accommodated. Their argument fails to take into account the pressure this will put on parents and educators to place children in the classroom first and to ask questions later, contrary to an evidence based approach and contrary to an accommodation of the child's real needs. Some parents, will not have a professional background to rely upon when dealing with the education system. Many are talked down to by educators. When told that the classroom is the right option for their child they not be inclined, or able, to challenge that position. With the Human Rights Commission creating a presumptive norm in favor of the classroom inclusion option there will be no realistic choice for the parents to consider in deciding how, and where, their child, severely autistic or otherwise should be educated.

The full inclusion model limits choice as Mr. Henteleff points out. The persistent efforts by the NBACL and its inclusion lobbyists to promote the full inclusion model has in practice limited choice for some parents and their autistic children who might be better served in a quieter environment outside the mainstream classroom. Mr. Porter, who has been a significant part of that push for full inclusion, and who is now the Chair of the New Brunswick Human Rights Commission, has presided over Commission guidelines which will reinforce the presumption of full classroom inclusion - to the detriment of some autistic children.

Read more »

New Brunswick Autism Education: Everyone in the Mainstream Classroom Inclusion Model Continues to Hold Back Progress

I have been a frequent promoter of the progress made in New Brunswick in the education of autistic students. Recent developments though show the extent to which that progress has been uneven with ultimate implementation of changes being left to the School District level. A bilingual and bifurcated Education department in New Brunswick has resulted in some francophone districts preferring to go it alone or to follow models from outside New Brunswick.

Two developments have spurred the  progress that has been made. One is  the training of 4-500 teacher assistants at the excellent UNB-CEL Autism Intervention Training program. The program has received high marks on external review by Dr. Eric Larsson and has included knowledgeable guest speakers like David Celiberti of the Association for Science in Autism Treatment.  The UNB-CEL AIT program has emphasized both quality and integrity with course entry requirements, substantial practicum and examination requirements. Unfortunately the program has been opposed by some in the Department of Education who felt that the program, which resulted from political-parent consultation, represented a loss of departmental influence. The Department is now moving back to what it has wanted all along ...  an in house training program with all the inherent conflicts of interest, quality and integrity issues that in house training brings with it. Some school districts have also refused to enroll teacher assistants in the program particularly in New Brunswick's francophone school districts which have tended to go their own direction in New Brunswick's bilingual and bifurcated education system.

Progress has also been made in modernizing inclusion in New Brunswick schools.  For years the dominant "everybody in the mainstream classroom" approach pushed hard by  the New Brunswick Association for Community Living and by Gordon Porter,  the former chair of the New Brunswick Human Rights Commission,  has held total sway in New Brunswick.  This approach does not reflect the research literature, or the experience of families like ours, which says that not ALL students with autism belong in the mainstream classroom.  I have presented legal reviews and research literature reviews to the MacKay Inclusion Review, (Professor MacKay is one of the worst offenders, and I use the term "offender" intentionally, when it comes to promoting the "everybody in the mainstream classroom" model of inclusion).

My son used to come home with bite marks on his hands and wrists from his days in a mainstream classroom where he was overstimulated, and learning a different subject matter, using different methods than the other children in his class. Once removed from the class for most of his  academic learning his self injury ceased and his school career has been a true joy as I have indicated many, many times on this blog.  Conor has not been sent to a prison like isolation room.  He has been educated in a small side room with an autism trained teacher assistant. The room is decorated with the usual learning tools and is not in the least restrictive. Conor visists the school gym, pool, kitchen and library.  He is around other children there and in the halls.  I have seen children greet him at school many, many times.  Conor's classroom is the school and he is not alone in such accommodations which have been made for other students in District 18.

The concept of the whole school as a classroom or learning environment is not mine. I am not a professional educator and I did not come up with it. The person who did relay that concept to me was Alex Dingwall the Superintendent of School District 18.  The use of the whole school environment. to provide alternative learning locations and accommodation for autistic children who can not function in the mainstream classroom is not mine. It may or may not be Superintendent Dingwall's but it was he who relayed it to me during a settlement conference for a Human Rights complaint I had filed on behalf of my son and which I ultimately withdrew because he has been accommodated in our neighborhood schools here in Fredericton.

I caught some of the CBC coverage of the Moncton child placed in a jail like time out room. I heard Krista Carr of the NBACL offering her commentary without acknowledging that the system in place in that school district is the total inclusion, everybody in the mainstream classroom, model which does not recognize that the classroom is not right for all children and does not put any emphasis on providing alternate learning locations outside the mainstream classroom. The total inclusion model pushed by the NBACL, by the former chair of the NB Human Rights Commission and by Professor Wayne Mackay has failed and harmed some New Brunswick autistic students, including, for a brief period of time, my own son. Thankfully Conor has,  long since his failed mainstream classroom experience, had access to an alternate learning location in our neighborhood schools. The credit for that accommodation does not belong to me, or to Professor Wayne MacKay,  former Human Rights Commissioner Gordon Porter or NBACL official Krista Carr. The credit belongs to educators at School District 18 who have accommodated my son's disability.

Read more »

New Brunswick Human Rights Commission Guidelines Discriminate Against Autistic Students

The New Brunswick Human Rights Commision has adopted new guidelines to accommodating students with a disability in New Brunswick schools - New Brunswick Human Rights Commission, Guideline on Accommodating Students with a Disability. Unfortunately for some New Brunswick students with Autism Disorder the guidelines themselves fail to accommodate their disability and in doing so discriminate against some students with profound Autism Disorder. The guidelines fail to accommodate by creating a "norm" or presumption in favor of mainstream classroom placement even though, for some autistic students, the mainstream classroom in not an appropriate place of learning, can be overwhelming to environmentally sensitive autistic children and can be result in dangerous, self injurious behavior.

When the NB Human Rights Commission says that mainstream classroom placement is the norm education officials will quite understandably feel that it is necessary to place all children in the classroom. Essentially this "norm" will push students into the classroom who should be in a different, quieter, less busy location within the school in order for them to learn, and to not be overwhelmed. For those school districts who do not want to spend the money from their budget to accommodate more individualized instruction necessary for some autistic students placing them in the classroom without individualized instruction by autism specific trained Teacher Aides will be a cheap solution, as it has been in the past. And the presumption or norm created by the HRC will assist them in justifying their decision.

New Brunswick schools have, over the past 30 years, been dominated by an extreme inclusion model which saw all children dumped in the mainstream classroom without proper support and without regard for the individual conditions of some children with disabilities such as some severely autistic children. The result has been disruption in the classroom, failure to learn by some children, and in some cases, including my profoundly autistic son, dangerously self injurious behavior. Fortunately, over the past several years, the rigid ideological approach of the classroom inclusion for all philosophy has given way in some instances to an evidence based approach which requires examination of what actually works for each child. Educate the child in the way he or she learns best, in the environment in which he or she learns best. An evidence based approach is consistent with human rights policies by requiring an examination of the disability issues presented by the individual student. This evidence based approach was promised by the Province of New Brunswick Inter-Departmental Committee that examined autism services in New Brunswick between 1999 and 2001.

The IDC Report issued in November 2001, disclosed the already known fact that there were at that time very few autism specific services available in New Brunswick. The most significant accomplishment of the IDC Report was that it recommended an evidence based approach to provision of autism services. The three departments that sat on the IDC were Health, Family Services and .... Education. In fact, since that time there have been some to an evidence based approach being adopted in some New Brunswick schools.

My own son, profoundly autistic, was removed from the mainstream classroom, at our request, after he repeatedly came home from school with self inflicted bite marks on his hands and wrists. He was overwhelmed by the classroom. To the full credit of school, district, and Department officials they looked at the evidence and agreed to place Conor in a separate room for his instruction for most of the day. The education officials accommodated my son's disability by looking at his actual condition and educating him in an environment suitable for him in light of the realities of his autism disorder.

During the MacKay Review of Inclusive Education Autism Society NB presented a position paper for educating autistic students which called for an evidence based approach. Teaching children how and where they learn best in light of their actual condition. As one of the autism representatives I spoke on numerous occasions about the need for an evidence based approach for autistic students. For some autistic students the mainstream classroom is the appropriate learning environment. For others, including my son, it is not. This evidence based approach is supported by research including Mesibov and Shea (1996):

The concept of full inclusion is that students with special needs can and should be educated in the same settings as their normally developing peers with appropriate support services, rather than being placed in special education classrooms or schools. According to advocates the benefits of full inclusion are increased expectations by teachers, behavioral modeling of normally developing peers, more learning, and greater selfesteem. Although the notion of full inclusion has appeal, especially for parents concerned about their children's rights, there is very little empirical evidence for this approach, especially as it relates to children with autism. This manuscript addresses the literature on full inclusion and its applicability for students with autism. Although the goals and values underlying full inclusion are laudable, neither the research literature nor thoughtful analysis of the nature of autism supports elimination of smaller, highly structured learning environments for some students with autism.

This information was present throughout the Mackay Inclusion review process. In one session I attempted, along with ASNB Education Rep Dawn Bowie, to speak specifically about autism issues and the need for an evidence based approach by which autistic students are educated in a location, whether it be in the mainstream classroom or elsewhere, according to the realities of their individual conditions. My comments were met dismissively by a New Maryland school official who asserted that we were not there to talk about autism. They were also met with angry opposition by New Brunswick Human Rights Commission Chair Gordon Porter who was present and who told me and Mrs. Bowie that "you people should be thankful for what you have ". Mr. Porter then proceeded to talk about how bad it was in the Special Education system in New Brunswick many years ago and how the inclusion model was a very substantial improvement.

Given Mr. Porter's prominent role in putting the inclusion model in place in New Brunswick, and given his strong personal views, it is not surprising that the Human Rights Commission which he chairs has issued Guidelines which create a presumption in favor of classroom inclusion for all students. It is also not surprising in that the New Brunswick Association for Community Living was tasked by the Department of Education with holding professional development days for New Brunswick teachers to explain the recommendations of the MacKay Inclusion Review. The NBACL is a fierce advocate for the total inclusion model. The NBACL has paid staff who persistently lobby for the full inclusion model. An example are the awards they hand out to teachers in New Brunswick who best demonstrate inclusion practices in New Brunswick schools. The NBACL, in hosting the inclusion professional development days for teachers asked Gordon Porter to be the keynote speaker at the event. A request by ASNB to speak at the event, to speak with the teachers about autism, and the need for an evidence based approach, was rejected by the NBACL.

Mr. Porter and NBACL are both strongly committed to the full inclusion model and that commitment to a philosophy of classroom inclusion for all is reflected in the norm espoused by the new Human Rights Commission guidelines. The promotion of that norm by the Human Rights Commission will put even more pressure on teachers and school officials to put all students in the classroom. The promotion of that norm is contrary to the evidence based approach promised for autistic persons in the IDC Report and it is contrary to the duty to accommodate the individual differences of students with disabilities, particularly some students with profound autism disorder.

It was precisely that failure to accommodate individuals with disabilities that led Yude Henteleff QC to describe the full inclusion model as discriminatory in a paper he presented to the Canadian Assocation for Community Living in 2004. Mr. Henteleff has represented individuals with a variety of different disabilities including autism, deaf and hard of hearing,
aspergers, Tourette's syndrome, attention deficit hyperactivity disorders, developmental
disability, physical disability and the learning disabled. He has been the legal counsel for the Association of Parents of Children with Autism in Manitoba and has been associated with the Learning Disabilities Association of Canada. In The Fully Inclusive Classroom Is Only One Of The Right Ways To Meet The Best Interests Of The Special Needs Child Mr. Henteleff argued that the full inclusion approach is in itself discriminatory by failing to accommodate individual disability based differences. At page 2 he states:

It should be abundantly clear, having in mind the foregoing statistics, that for children
who suffer from emotional, mental, behavioural, cognitive, sensory, physical, expressive
language, visual and auditory difficulties (and often a combination of some of the foregoing), it is simply not possible to meet their diverse needs in one environment. One shoe simply cannot fit all.

Indeed, total inclusion is a discriminatory concept because it limits the environmental
choices, which groups of children and youth with differing difficulties have the right to make in their best interests.

I am completely dedicated to the public school system. I believe it is an integral part of
whom and what we are as Canadians living in a democratic society. That means a place where all children are welcomed - regardless of their gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, colour, religion, physical or mental condition. In other words, the public school system is a place where the social contract guaranteed by the Charter and Human Rights Codes is fulfilled. That social contract is that every individual is entitled to equality and to be free from discrimination.

However, schools being a welcoming place regardless of gender, ethnicity, colour,
religion, physical or mental condition, namely inclusivity, is far different from what is described as "full inclusion" in the general classroom. Full inclusion falls far short of guaranteeing equality.

Mr. Porter, the Commission, and the NBACL which all advocate for full inclusion will argue that establishing a norm does not mean that all children must be kept in the classroom at all times and that their disabilities are accommodated. Their argument fails to take into account the pressure this will put on parents and educators to place children in the classroom first and to ask questions later, contrary to an evidence based approach and contrary to an accommodation of the child's real needs. Some parents, will not have a professional background to rely upon when dealing with the education system. Many are talked down to by educators. When told that the classroom is the right option for their child they not be inclined, or able, to challenge that position. With the Human Rights Commission creating a presumptive norm in favor of the classroom inclusion option there will be no realistic choice for the parents to consider in deciding how, and where, their child, severely autistic or otherwise should be educated.

The full inclusion model limits choice as Mr. Henteleff points out. The persistent efforts by the NBACL and its inclusion lobbyists to promote the full inclusion model has in practice limited choice for some parents and their autistic children who might be better served in a quieter environment outside the mainstream classroom. Mr. Porter, who has been a significant part of that push for full inclusion, and who is now the Chair of the New Brunswick Human Rights Commission, has presided over Commission guidelines which will reinforce the presumption of full classroom inclusion - to the detriment of some autistic children.

Read more »