The Auditor's report is very readable and filled with sensible recommendations for changes that might help clarify or rectify things for parents, students and schools.

→ Read People for Education's synopsis of the 2008 report.

→ Read the full 2008 report from the Auditor General on Special Education.

Here are some examples of items in the report:

On report cards
The Auditor’s report says that there is still a lot of work to be done on report cards for students with IEPs. The report says, "we found examples, particularly at the elementary school level, where report cards discussed the student’s positive attributes but did not provide a candid discussion of the student’s performance relative to expectations.”

The Auditor said that in some schools, the teachers put marks right on the IEP so that parents, students and teachers can use them to really follow the student’s progress; and that in 2 of the 3 boards that were audited they had developed their own report cards especially for students with modified expectations (as opposed to students who receive accommodations but who are expected to work toward regular curriculum expectations.)

He recommended that the Ministry of Education should:

• reconsider the suitability of the standard provincial report card for reporting on the performance of students who are working toward modified expectations;
• provide examples of the type of performance reports it expects school boards to use for students working toward alternative expectations; and
• provide guidance to assist teachers in assessing the performance of students who are working toward reduced expectations for the current grade’s curriculum.
  

He said that school boards should:

• ensure that report cards provide parents and students with meaningful assessments of student performance relative to learning goals and expectations.”

On accountability, proto-types and choosing programs
There is no one proto-type for any sort of Special Education program.

The province is trying to develop a way for boards to report on their programs and on the effectiveness of them. This comes back to a question of how do we measure effectiveness. Are programs more effective if they get kids’ test scores up? Are they effective if, when we survey the students, they say they feel excited and engaged? The Auditor says, “Principals are required to ensure that their schools comply with numerous legislative, regulatory, and policy requirements regarding the delivery of special education services and programs. Superintendents are responsible for ensuring that the principals who report to them have taken appropriate steps to meet these requirements. However, the Ministry does not require boards to establish a formal inspection process to verify compliance by schools with legislative, regulatory, and policy requirements as, for example, financial institutions would have in place with respect to their branches.”

School boards have begun receiving some funding and advice from the Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat to assist them in reviewing the effectiveness of their Special Education programs. According to the Auditor’s report, the process is intended to “provide ways in which teachers and school and system administrators accept responsibility to hold themselves accountable for ensuring that research-based, effective strategies are consistently implemented across the province.”