Table Of Content

DOCUMENT RESUME EC 306 757 ED 423 651 Review of Learning Assistance Services Report (1997). TITLE British Columbia Dept. of Education, Victoria. Div. of INSTITUTION Special Education. PUB DATE 1997-00-00 217p.; Prepared by Desharnais & Associates. NOTE BC Ministry of Education, Special Programs Branch, PO Box AVAILABLE FROM 9165, Stn. Prov. Gov., Victoria, British Columbia V8W 9H4, Canada. Reports - Research (143) PUB TYPE EDRS PRICE MF01/PC09 Plus Postage. *Educational Innovation; Elementary Secondary Education; DESCRIPTORS Foreign Countries; *High Risk Students; Individualized Education Programs; Interviews; *Mild Disabilities; Parent Participation; Program Administration; Program Effectiveness; Special Education Teachers; Surveys; *Teacher Collaboration; Teacher Role; *Team Teaching British Columbia IDENTIFIERS ABSTRACT This report discusses the outcomes of a 1996-1997 review that investigated the current role of Learning Assistance Services in the delivery of special education support services to students in 115 British Columbia public schools and the students who receive these services. Learning Assistance Services are described as school-based, non-categorical resource services designed to support classroom teachers and their students who have mild to moderate difficulties in learning and adjustment. The study also examined the impact of Individual Education Plan (IEP) requirements on students' educational programs, parent participation, and teachers' (1) there is a significant variation in how workloads. Findings include: sample school districts and schools set out policies and procedures to govern (2) in many cases, the provision of Learning Assistance Services; policies/procedures guidelines are somewhat dated and do not appear to reflect the significant changes that have occurred relative the to provision of Learning Assistance Services; and (3) the Learning Assistance Program tends to be more oriented to "pull-out" and Learning Assistance Center programs in secondary schools than in elementary schools. Appendices include the rationale for the learning assistance reviews, the school survey, interview questions, ministry learning assistance guidelines, and supplemental reports that expand on findings. (CR) ******************************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. ******************************************************************************** REVIEW OF LEARNING ASSISTANCE SERVICES REPORT (1997) BC Ministry of Education Special Programs Branch PO Box 9165 Stn. Prov. Gov. Victoria, British Columbia V8W 9H4 PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of emotional Research and Improvement EDUC IONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) his document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. O Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy. Review of Learning Assistance Services Report (1997) Table of Contents Introduction Project Purpose Approach / Scope Methodology Analytical Framework Analysis of Findings General Framework LA The Learning Assistance Resource LA Services to Students LA Services Planning & Documentation LA Services Finding Out About Results Challenge and Change Positive Changes to LA Services Challenges That Have Emerged Suggestions For Improvement Implications of Findings Review Implications Conclusion Appendices/Report Supplements Review of Learning Assistance Services Report (1997) INTRODUCTION Learning Assistance Services are described by the Ministry of Education, Skills and Training as school-based, non-categorical resource services designed to support classroom teachers and their students who have mild to moderate difficulties in learning and adjustment. In 1995-1996 the Ministry issued a major revision to Special Education Services: A Manual of Policies, Procedures and Guidelines. In addition, the Individual Educational Plan Order (M0638195) was implemented and set out the requirement for the development and maintenance of IEP's for all students receiving supplemental special education services where such services are provided for fifteen (15) or more hours in a given school year. The Minister of Education, Skills and Training recently announced that a review of Learning Assistance Services would be conducted in the current school year (1996-1997). The stated purpose "f th= raviow INAC to HAtArminA and describe the current role of Learning Assistance in the delivery of special education support services to students in British Columbia's public schools and the students who receive these services. The study was also to examine the impact of Individual Education Plan (IEP) requirements on students' educational programs, parent participation and teachers' workloads. The Special Programs Branch of the Ministry advised school districts that the review would : 1. provide a current "snapshot" of Learning Assistance Services; 2. assist the Ministry in its ongoing review of provincial special education policy and guidelines; 3. assist the educational partners in discussing and addressing current and emerging issues in the delivery of Learning Assistance Services and; 4. provide current information upon which to build support for "best practice" strategies. The Special Programs Branch was assisted in the development of the review by an Advisory Committee comprised of representatives from the following key partner groups: British Columbia School Trustees' Association British Columbia School Superintendents' Association British Columbia Principals' and Vice Principals' Association British Columbia Teachers' Federation British Columbia Teachers' Federation - Learning Assistance Teachers Association (PSA) British Columbia Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils British Columbia Council of Administrators of Special Education University of British Columbia In accordance with established criteria and a Request For Proposal Process, 4 Desharnais and Associates were engaged to conduct the review and to structure the review in order to answer key research questions set out by the Advisory Committee : 1. In the sampled schools, what are current school district policies regarding the delivery of Learning Assistance Services ? 2. Which students receive Learning Assistance Services ? 3. What is the nature of the Learning Assistance Services currently provided in B.C. schools ? 4. How are Learning Assistance Services documented and how is information about student progress conveyed ? 5. What is known about the efficacy of Learning Assistance Services ? School districts were further advised that the review would provide a vehicle for school districts to better understand and refine the nature of district practices related to the delivery of Learning Assistance Services and that the review would yield valuable information to the larger special education community. PROJECT PURPOSE To conduct a review of Learning Assistance Services through the collection of data/information from a stratified sample survey of twenty-nine (29) school districts and two hundred and two (202) schools covering five regions of the province. To supplement the survey information through visitations to ten (10) school districts conducting structured : School visits/interviews (30 schools) Interviews with District Office administrative personnel (10 meetings) Meetings with Learning Assistance Teachers/Regular Classroom Teachers (10 meetings) Meetings with Parents of Learning Assistance students (10 meetings). To conduct a thorough review and analysis of all data/information relative to the key research questions. To examine and identify potential implications related to emerging patterns or trends, service delivery similarities or variations, human resource demands. APPROACH/SCOPE The consultant was requested to organize and manage a process for data collection and field visits / field-work meetings and interviews involving a stratified sample of schools representing each of the five regions of the province and involving two hundred and two (202) schools.The process was to take into consideration that the participation of school districts and schools in the provision of the data was to be on a voluntary and confidential basis. The consultant met with Special Programs Branch staff and the Advisory Committee to the project to review and finalize : project timelines key research questions and data requirements the stratified sample / framework developed by the consultant (draft) the survey / questionnaire instrument developed by the consultant (draft) the project 'rationale' developed by the consultant (draft) the draft letters developed by the consultant to be sent out to districts and schools: those with schools to be surveyed those with schools to be surveyed and who would also participate in the field-work component. the field-work plan and schedule including the structured meeting and interview formats developed by the consultant (draft). fo!!.v.ving tasks : The cc)n.su!tant(s) then comple,t.--1 produced the print-ready School Survey - Learning Assistance Services for distribution by the Special Programs Branch. arranged for 10 LA teachers to review the survey instrument in terms of " workability " or response " feasibility ". produced the communication packages to be distributed to the districts and schools by the Special Programs Branch (letters, rationale, school lists, visitation schedules). contacted Superintendents to arrange field visits (school visits, interviews, meetings) (telephone & fax). arranged for the distribution of letters, survey forms and lists of sampled schools to participating (identified) districts (29). provided consultation and advice to districts/schools related to survey form completion. conducted field visits to ten (10) school districts in five regions ( 30 schools ). compiled field-work information for analysis. collected survey data from all participating school districts. processed all available data/information and produced data reports for conducting analysis. developed an analytical framework in order to analyze the data across a number of domains. METHODOLOGY 1. A survey sample (stratified) was conducted accordingly : With a desired target of 100 school survey returns it was decided to survey 202 schools from the five regions of the province. From a list of school district populations by region supplied by the Special Programs Branch, districts in each region were selected by size within the region (small; mid-size; larger). The number of schools to be surveyed in each region were ie., the selected proportionally according to student population . . . regional student population in relation to the overall/provincial 6 student population with the percentage (%) yielding the percentage (%) of the 202 schools to be surveyed overall : X 100 = % of 202 Schools (provincial) Regional Pop. Provincial Pop. The number of schools to be surveyed in each selected district within each region was determined proportionally according to each district's student population as a percentage (%) of the total student population of the selected districts in the region yielding the percentage (%) of the total number of schools to be surveyed in the region, which then yields the number of schools to be surveyed in each school district : x 100 = % of Schools ( regional ) District Pop. Selected Regional Districts Pop. From the list of schools by district with school populations supplied by the Special Programs Branch (Public and Independent Schools Book 1995) schools were selected by size and type. SCHOOL SURVEY - LEARNING ASSISTANCE SERVICES SAMPLE ( OVERVIEW ) Regions ( 5 ) : 1. Kootenay 2. Okanagan-Cariboo 3. Lower Mainland / Coast 4. Vancouver Island 5. North School Districts ( 29 ) : Small School Districts ( 9 ) Mid-Size School Districts ( 11 ) Larger School Districts ( 9 ) Schools ( 202 ) : 7 Small Schools - Elementary 45 ) ( Small Schools - Secondary ) ( Mid-Size Schools Elementary 57 ) ( Mid-Size Schools - Secondary 23 ) ( Larger Schools - Elementary 30 ) ( Larger Schools - Secondary 39 ) ( Total 202 2. A data collection package was developed and approved for distribution to the 29 school districts selected for the sample. The Special Programs Branch sent out these packages on May 15 - 19 with a return date deadline of June 20. This package contained : Letter to Superintendent of Schools from the Director of the Special Programs Pranch announcing thP rPviPw, providing pertinent details and seeking cooperalion and participation in the study (copies to Board Chairpersons and to education partner groups represented on the Advisory Committee) ( Refer to Appendix 1 ). Letter to Superintendent of Schools from the Consultant announcing the review, providing pertinent details, and seeking cooperation and participation in the study and providing a list of schools to be surveyed in the district and where applicable, (10 districts) providing detailed information about planned field-work in the district by the consultant(s) (copies to school principals and .... Board Chairpersons ) (Refer to Appendix 1). Rationale for the collection of survey data and field information. ( See Appendix 2 ). School Surveys - Learning Assistance Services ( for schools to be surveyed) with completion instructions and survey return information. ( See Appendix 3 ). In those districts participating in the field-work component of the review (10), Superintendents were contacted in mid- May by telephone to finalize arrangements for the field visits (interviews, meetings, locations, times, announcements). Immediate follow-up by fax was undertaken (copy of package coming to the district from the Special Programs Branch). 4. Field Visits were conducted in ten (10 ) school districts ( May 25 - June 6) : visits to 30 schools ( 3 in each district )... on-site structured discussion/interview with LA Teacher (s) and Administrators ( 78 participants ).... some discussions with students ( 10-15 ) related to their perceptions of the service provided, whether they had IEP's and whether they found these helpful, whether they liked coming to the LA Center. structured interviews with Superintendent and /or district special 8 programs administrator (s) ( 10 districts ) ( 16 participants ). structured meetings open to LA Teachers and Regular Classroom Teachers ( 10 districts ) ( 138 participants ). structured meetings open to parents of Learning Assistance Students ( 10 districts ) ( 146 participants ). (Please refer to Appendix 4 for Meeting/Interview Question Formats ) 5. A total of 115 schools returned completed survey forms by June 20/97. This constitutes a 57% rate of return. LIMITATIONS OF THE REVIEW The review has been subject to a number of limitations : Timeframe the collection of data and information for the review ... had to be conducted within a limited " research window " ( May 25 - June 20 ) in order for the review to be completed before the end of the current school year. Timeframe due to the limited research window for the analysis ... of all data and information derived from the school visits, the various meetings and interviews and the school survey ,there was not time for some further explorations related to possible data connections ( for example trying to match FTE LA Teacher Ratio information to reported Caseload information by size of school, size of district and by region or to type of program and students served ). Timeframe the review was conducted at a point in the school ... year when LA teachers are extremely busy with year-end functions including " transition work ", follow-up assessments , program documentation and report preparation and this may have affected the responses to the school survey questions. In addition, the timing of the review may have affected the level of participation in the field work meetings. Communications although the review information, including ... rationale, meeting schedules and the actual surveys were distributed to districts by the Special Programs Branch in mid-May, there were some reported cases where participants indicated they had received notices just a few days before scheduled meetings and some cases where surveys were received by LA teachers without the accompanying rationale / purpose. Size of Meeting Samples Some caution must be exercised due ... to the size of the representative samples resulting from the meetings involving teachers ( 138 ) and parents ( 146 ) within the field-work component of the review. In addition, it was not possible to conduct consensus-taking activities or to engage in detailed response tabulations during the meetings. Instead common themes were identified and repeated responses were captured and summarized. School Survey Responses As with most surveys of this nature ... care must be exercised due to the variation in the number of respondents answering each question ... some do not answer all questions or some only answer one part of the question ... therefore results can vary between questions and sometimes within questions making it very difficult to analyze data connections or to cross reference some information items. ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK The data/information derived from the survey and the information derived from the school visits and structured interviews and meetings (the field-work component) were analyzed according to the following analytical framework : A. Data / Information the key research questions statistical trends PmArging pat_thrns service delivery similarities or variations related to policy-procedure frameworks related to service delivery model related to district characteristics (size; type) related to school characteristics (size; type ) human resource demands related to nature of program/services/students related to caseload/service demand related to administrative requirements service delivery/identified "best practices" and suggested improvements service delivery / challenges identified program / service efficacy considerations B. Implications of the data / information related to trends / patterns related to provincial, school district and school levels. 1 0