Inclusion commission has a monumental task

The inclusion commission, consisting of Adela Njie representing the Nova Scotia Teachers Union (NSTU), Monica Williams representing the government and independent chairperson Dr. Sarah Shea is charged with the daunting task of redesigning our education system.

When inclusion was first introduced, it had two goals:

1)to include special needs students in regular classrooms

2)but, to do it without allowing the system to slip into the depths of mediocrity.

It was implemented from the top down and kept the old model until classrooms became overburdened with a kaleidoscope of needs and problems it didn’t have the resources to address.

It failed, primarily for two reasons.

1) The first was it lacked reason. Inclusion was thrust upon us without considering if it was even possible and, if so, how much could we handle. Where was the logic or the benefit in including someone with an early childhood cognitive ability in an upper-level, academic classroom?

Hopefully, any future model will begin with the realistic question: does a child have the cognitive ability, with reasonable support (adaptations, modifications and IPP’s) to meet the minimal standards needed to function at a particular grade-level?

2) The Savage government inherited a monumental debt from the Buchanan government, and had to slash the budgets of every department, including the education department. It didn’t have the fiscal capability to provide the kind of programs or to hire the kinds of expertise needed to address those special needs.

To implement inclusive education properly will require a huge infusion of money. I did hear the number $150 million mentioned during the literacy presentation, but without elaboration. That figure shouldn’t be surprising when you consider the small student-teachers ratios, and the specialists many of these children will need to cope and succeed.

However, I think the commission will soon realize they are dealing with problems that have a much larger and far more pervasive scope. For example, why do we have so many children with such a range of special needs? Why do so many have such extreme behaviour problems?

In its initial report, “Turning Points,” the inclusion commission stated there were 494 special needs cases studied, consisting of a primary diagnosis of 31 types, and a secondary diagnosis of 54 types of special needs. The primary diagnosis showed that autistic students at 25 per cent were the largest group; with 25 per cent of those students having communication deficits and another 25 per cent having cognitive delays. However, 61 per cent of all special needs students surveyed had a secondary diagnosis of severe behavioral problems, and 30 per cent were diagnosed with severe mental health issues. That means only 44 of those 494 surveyed (nine per cent) did not have severe behaviour or emotional problems. These aren’t education issues and I wonder if we have the resources to deal with some of these issues, or if such resources exist.

We are painfully aware of the devastating and permanent neurological effects of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. Could we be seeing the effects of what will eventually be called Fetal Methadone Syndrome? If so, will the damage be permanent? Yes, babies can be weaned off the drug, but are they left with the neurological consequences? How realistic is it to expect our education system to address the very issues that society hasn’t been able to address?