School cuts blamed on government
Your Oct. 11 editorial blames the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board for cutting special education programs and placing many special needs students in regular classrooms without appropriate support. It also says that the board betrayed a promise not to make cuts this year.
While the editorial is right about the serious impact of the recent cuts, there is a lack of clarity about who is responsible.
The trustees elected in 2000 consistently refused to make significant cuts to special education until the province establishes standards to determine the level of service to be provided.
The province initiated work on standards for the various special education exceptionalities over two years ago. These standards were to have been progressively released during 2001-02. None has seen the light of day.
The refusal of the board last spring to make further cuts in special education contributed to its approval of a deficit budget for the 2002-03 school year.
As a result, the Ernie Eves government appointed a supervisor to take over the goverance of the Ottawa board in August.
Despite government assurances that cuts would not impact on student programs and services this year, the first act of supervisor Merv Beckstead was to cut $4.7 million from the budget.
More than $3.5 million of this involved the removal of 50 teachers and eight educational assistants from special education classes. The elected trustees have been very vocal in their criticism of this cut.
Your editorial also criticizes the expenditure of funds on programs for gifted students.
It is often argued that gifted children do all right on their own. It is true that some do well in regular classrooms. There is, however, evidence that most gifted students require special programming to realize their potential. This is why giftedness is an exceptionality recognized in provincial legislation.
Many gifted students become frustrated and drop out of school if they do not receive educational programs designed to suit their unique learning needs.
They deserve, as much as students with other exceptionalities, to have their special needs met. This can be done through “program differentiation” in the regular classroom, “withdrawal” programs where gifted students leave the regular classroom for enrichment or through congregated or special classes including only gifted students.
Although attention usually focuses on the cost of “congregated” classes for gifted students, what is not understood is that these are virtually the same size as classes for regular students.
Class size is the main determinant of the cost of education. The only significant additional cost associated with the delivery of gifted classes is transportation. And even this has been cut back in recent years.
Joan Spice,
Trustee for Zone 10, OCDSB
Ottawa-Carleton District School Board
Arnold supportive of cyclists
I am writing in reference to your front page article in the Oct. 25 issue on the cycling consultations
I am quoted as saying, “We’re looking for help, but we’re not getting any from councillors.”
What I said in my discussion with your reporter is that many frustrated residents have called my office because they are not getting help from their councillors or the police on this issue and don’t know where to turn.
These comments came from other parts of Ottawa and Centretown Coun. Elisabeth Arnold is not one of the “non-responsive” councillors in question.
In fact, she is very supportive of CfSC and the work we do promoting cycling as a viable transportation option.
We continue to enjoy a good working relationship with Coun. Arnold and her staff.
I simply want to clarify what was discussed.
Jennifer Allen
Cycling Safety and Promotion Program Co-ordinator