Bid for more access to special classes for gifted kids on hold
Ottawa school board trustees shelved a motion Tuesday that would have changed the way gifted students are treated after staff told them it might violate provincial rules.
The controversial motion from trustee Christine Boothby was aimed at giving parents more control in the decision to place their gifted children into specialized classes. However, board officials said the idea might violate provincial regulations that give schoolbased committees the legal right to determine where students are placed.
Boothby, supported by many parents of gifted students, said she was concerned about the rapid decline of the number of congregated gifted classes.
Students with special-education exceptionalities must start out in a regular classroom before being placed in a congregated class.
Boothby’s motion would have allowed gifted students to skip that step, which was controversial among some parents who have children with other special-education needs, such as learning disabilities, autism and developmental delays.
Boothby said she hopes to revise her idea in consultation with board staff and bring it back. Trustees agreed to postpone the motion.
The board also directed staff to review the process for identifying and placing all children with exceptionalities.
Trustees heard from a dozen parent delegations, including Michael Sims, who has four children under age 10 with multiple special needs, including learning disabilities, developmental delays, mental health issues and sensory problems.
With special-education dollars always stretched thin, Sims says he is upset about the idea of giving different treatment to gifted students. The idea doesn’t pass the “smell test,” he told trustees.
So far in the debate, trustees only heard from parents of gifted children, he said. Some disadvantaged parents who have children with other special needs are not lobbying but their voices should be heard too, Sims said.
The debate pits parents against each other in a zero-sum game: money given to one group is taken away from another.
“I’m furious that the gifted parents are attempting to divert funds away from the rest of the school population at a time when the system is starved for funds,” said Sims in an interview. “It’s incredibly inequitable, not just for the children with high needs, but for the entire student body.”
More educational assistants are needed in regular classrooms, where teachers are expected to help students with a great variety of learning challenges, he said.
He gives the example of one of his children, who in kindergarten was so disruptive that the rest of the children had to regularly evacuate the classroom while his child stood on a desk and threw things. There was not enough money for a full-time educational assistant in the classroom to help her.
Most of the delegations on Tuesday explained how important the congregated gifted classes were for their children. Parent Kristin Kilby said her gifted son was bullied by peers and staff in the regular classroom, excluded from classes and recess, suspended multiple times and developed significant mental health issues.
School staff said his failures in the class would strengthen his application for a congregated class, where he is now thriving because he feels “socially and emotionally safe,” she said.
Some parents have accused board staff of trying to eliminate the gifted classes by stealth.
The number of gifted elementary students in congregated classes has fallen from 692 in 2013-2014 to 416 in 2017-2018, according to the board. Board staff opposed the idea of allowing gifted students to be put directly into a congregated class, saying it was unfair to treat them differently than other special-ed students.
They also warned that money spent transporting more gifted students to congregated classes would have to be cut from other programs. For example, if the number of gifted students in gifted classes climbed back up to 700, it would cost the board an extra $800,000 a year in transportation.