Perspectives on the OPA Student Assessment Project - Learning ...

The Ministry PerspectiveThe OPA Student Assessment Project:Kindergarten to Grade 4OntarioRobert Spall, Education OfficerBruce Drewett, DirectorSpecial Education Policy and Programs BranchMinistry of Education“Coming together is a beginning, staying together isprogress, and working together is success.”The above quote by Vesta Kelly aptly describes whatwe, at the ministry, have experienced while workingwith the Ontario Psychological Association (OPA) andits Student Assessment Project.In the spring of 2006, the Ontario governmentannounced funding to school boards to supportassessments for students who require special educationprograms and/or services. This was a component ofthe early identification and intervention initiatives thatsupport the Ministry of Education’s strategic direction.A core committee of OPA members was created tomanage the project and ensure that its objectives wereattainable and on track. It was decided that there neededto be an ongoing relationship with staff from the SpecialEducation Policy and Programs Branch of the Ministryof Education. Along with the executive director,president of the OPA and chief psychologists from anumber of school boards, ministry staff were asked tobe part of this committee. Later the committee expandedto include the newly hired project manager and afrancophone psychologist from a school board.This committee developed the four objectives for theproject. There was ongoing discussion between theOPA and the ministry as these objectives evolved.Everyone at the table learned to understand and respecteach other’s perspective and to find ways to make thiscollaborative process work.work. A second team was formed. A provincial advisorycommittee was established to represent psychology,occupational therapy and speech/language pathology, aswell as the perspective of educators from school boards.The OPA chose to invite ministry staff to this committeetable to provide English and French-language specialeducation policy perspectives.This committee proved to be incredibly helpful to theevolution of the project as it provided an informedsounding board for the project plans. As this workprogressed, the objectives grew, changed and evolved.After a final version of the project plan was approved bythe core committee, it was time to promote the project tothe school boards.Each school board was asked to name an OPA projectteam and the OPA assigned a monitor/coach to supportthis team. The ministry has been fully involved in thiscrucial, hands-on component, including supporting thedevelopment of school board project plans and monitoringtheir progress in achieving the four project objectives.There was no obligation for the OPA to involve theministry in all aspects of the project as it chose to do. Theexecutive director, the president and the project managerview this project as a partnership between the ministryand the association. There is a deep sense of responsibilityto provide the ministry with results that are accountable,support student achievement, and show improvement inassessment processes in school boards across the provincethat are sustainable.It became clear to the OPA that a broader provincialperspective would be helpful to inform the committee’sPsychology Ontario 3

The ministry has some specific outcomes that it wants to see as a result of thisproject. These outcomes centre on the classroom teacher providing effectiveinstruction based on assessment information. This includes a better abilityof the teacher to assess students in the classroom, as well as to better use,through program design and delivery, assessment information provided throughprofessional assessments.To achieve these goals the project needs to address the whole assessment processin school boards. This would include teacher educational assessments andthe referral and follow-up processes for professional assessment reports. Finally, the project needs to support thedevelopment of the Individual Education Plan (IEP). These objectives were directly based on the recommendationsregarding assessment in Education For All: The Report of the Expert Panel on Literacy and Numeracy for StudentsWith Special Education Needs, Kindergarten to Grade 6. The OPA has built a project model that is in sync with thesedesired outcomes.One indirect result is the project has brought the working relationship between curriculum and special educationdepartments closer together in many school boards. This is a very desirable development to enhance learning for allstudents.Since the moment when the project was first announced, a sense of commonpurpose and commitment emerged. A workingteam that operates on mutual trust and respect is inplace. This team has built and will sustain a positiverelationship between the OPA and the ministry longafter the end date of the project passes.Designing a Project for SuccessMarg Peppler, Project ManagerOPA Student Assessment ProjectI have spent most of my career working on project teams and managing projects in highly technical environments. Istarted out at Ontario Hydro in cost engineering and scheduling during the construction of the Bruce Nuclear PowerDevelopment. Over the years, my experience included projects in industrial marketing, business and strategicplanning, process re-engineering and customer service. I became the Manager of Customer Policies and Programsfor the transmission / distribution division, and eventually left the electricity business to pursue my consulting career.The next few years were spent working for the Ontario Government on information technology transition and otherIT projects.In September 2006, I received a call that was to open the door to a whole new area of project management. I wasoffered the position of working with the Ontario Psychological Association (OPA) and the Ontario school boards asleader of the OPA Student Assessment Project. The Ministry of Education had provided the OPA with $20 millionto support school boards to reduce the current waiting times for students requiring assessments and to enhanceteacher capacity. I was both uneasy and delighted with this new opportunity and change in my career direction. Butthen, project management is always about change. With my recently acquired Project Management Professionalcredentials, and the excitement about helping young students to learn, I couldn’t wait to get started.4 Psychology Ontario

Setting the DirectionAccording to the PMBOK Guide 1 , a project is “a temporary endeavorundertaken to create a unique product, service or result.” By the time Iwas hired, the Ministry of Education and the OPA had already definedat a high level the unique results they wanted to accomplish. Keyoutcomes identified in early communications from the Ministry ofEducation and the OPA to school boards included: reduce wait timesfor professional assessments 2 for JK to grade 4 students; enhanceteacher capacity; and help students to succeed. I knew from experiencethat clear direction would be crucial, and that the best way to developthat clarity would be to consult with the project stakeholders – thosewho have a “stake” in the outcome of the project. The OPA had already set up a solid governance structure to makedecisions, manage and advise the project. My first order of business was to facilitate a workshop with the project’sAdvisory Group and listen carefully to what they had to say.The Advisory Group included representatives from schoolboard psychology, speech language pathology, occupationaltherapy, the Ministry of Education, and the OPA Boardof Directors. I was impressed with the enthusiasm andinsights of the group as the expectations, concerns andhigh hopes for the future were expressed at that first halfdaymeeting. When it was over, we all understood forthe first time that the project was not just about doingprofessional assessments. It was about making changes tothe assessment process, starting with the process of decidingwhich students would benefit from a professional assessment, then assessing the student, next supporting teachersin implementing assessment recommendations, then evaluating the impact of interventions on student success, andmaking assessment process changes based on lessons learned.Working with OPA’s decision-making committee and the Ministry of Education, four project objectives were created:1. reduce wait times for students in junior kindergarten to grade IV requiring professional assessments2. enhance teacher capacity to provide effective programming for students provided with professional assessments3. improve literacy / numeracy for students provided with professional assessments4. sustain assessment process improvements for the long termTo further elaborate on our direction, I worked with the stakeholders to expand and clarify our vision of the successfulachievement of the four objectives, and to define how we would measure success.Planning Our ApproachNow that I knew where we were headed, my thoughts turned to implementation. How was I going to work with sucha diverse group of school boards to achieve these objectives? I was fortunate in that the Council of Ontario Directorsof Education 3 special education projects had been launched the previous year. With much appreciated advice andguidance from Frank Kelly, the Executive Director of CODE, and project lead,Michelle Forge, I was able to scope out a basic approach to working with schoolboards.Another serious order of business was to determine a fair way to divide up the $20million grant among the 72 school boards and 3 school authority groups with theirwide variation in enrollment, geographic location, and language. We ran manyProject GovernanceOPABoard ofDirectorsCore CommitteeProject Manager &TeamAdvisory GroupAccountablefor theProjectDecision Makers on Behalfof the OPA Board ofDirectorsResponsible to CoreCommittee for Planning,Execution, Control, ClosureInform the Decisionsof the Project Managerand TeamPsychology Ontario 5

Getting to Know You:Working with School Boards forStudent SuccessBeverley Terrell-Deutsch, Ph.D., C. Psych.,Monitoring Lead,OPA Student Assessment ProjectAlmost exactly one year ago today I heard from Marg Peppler, the Project Manager, that I was being offered the positionof Monitoring Lead for the OPA Student Assessment Project. I was excited and pleased, but truth be told, was also a littleanxious about what I had gotten myself into. How exactly had all this happened? I wasn’t even looking for a part-time job,and working on a school board project was not how I had envisioned spending my next two years. Why then had I agreedto attend the job interview in the first place? Good question. Simple answer … when Marg had first called and described theproject to me, it sounded intriguing. Imagine - having an opportunity to support school boards across Ontario in enhancingtheir educational and professional assessment processes for young students with learning needs!“… and the over-arching objective of the project?” I had asked.“Student success,” she answered.Who could turn down such an amazing opportunity? With $20 million in the bank waiting to be spent on assessment andcapacity building services for Junior Kindergarten to Grade 4 students, I was hooked.Early LearningI have learned so much in the past twelve months. Having grown up, lived and worked my whole life in the Barrie and Torontoareas (working for the Simcoe County Board of Education as an elementary teacher and then in the Peel District SchoolBoard, first as a Psychoeducational Consultant and later as the Chief Psychologist), I had little idea what was happening inschool boards in other parts of Ontario. I didn’t even know what a Ministry of Education Regional Office (aka RO) was… there are six of them, you know … London, Greater Toronto, Barrie, Ottawa, North Bay / Sudbury and Thunder Bay…the ROs are the administrative centres for all of the school boards within designated geographic areas. I also learned aboutEOs … Education Officers … many of these individuals work in the Regional Offices where they have supervisory andadministrative responsibilities. EOs work in the ROs … see, it’s easy. I also did not know that there are 72 school boardsin Ontario and many tiny School Authorities, which are often a “single school” school board located in remote regions ofnorthern Ontario.One of the first things I was to learn as a new member of the OPA project team was who else was on the team with me. Marg,our leader, (of course); then Ed Blackstock with whom I had worked for many years in Peel when he was Chief Psychologistand I was working in the field; Énide Émond, our French language member, a former School Board Superintendent and8 Psychology Ontario

Education Officer; and Bob Spall, alsoan Education Officer with the Ministryof Education who has many years ofschool board experience in the area ofspecial education.That’s it - five of us, each, as part of ourjob, serving as “coach” for a dozen ormore school boards. As coaches, wehave been available to our school boardsshould they have questions or concernsabout any of the project requirements orprocedures. The OPA project has a “100%success policy.” Part of the coach’s jobis to support, encourage and ensure thesuccess of each of their school boards.Responsibilities of the MonitoringLeadAs might be expected early on with anyproject, there are many questions thatcan arise for stakeholders, (i.e., thosewho have a “stake,” or vested interest, inthe outcome of the project). One of thefirst major responsibilities I undertook asMonitoring Lead was to write the “OPAStudent Assessment Project Questionsand Answers” document. This was madeavailable to school boards to assist withboth general and also more detailed /specific types of questions having to dowith any aspect of the project.In November 2006, a template askingschool boards to describe their“Assessment Capacity Building Plan”(ACBP) was sent out, to be completedand returned to the OPA in January2007. Among other things, in thistemplate school boards were askedto describe how they planned to: (a)identify students targeted for professionalassessments, (b) enhance the educationalassessment process (i.e., assessmentsto be completed by teachers prior to areferral being made for a professionalassessment) 1 , (c) support teachers inimplementing recommendations madein professional assessment reports, and(d) sustain process improvements for thelong term.For six weeks in April and May lastspring, it was my job, as MonitoringLead, to travel across Ontario and meetwith members of each school board’sOPA project team and the region’sEducation Officer 2 to discuss howschool boards were progressing withtheir ACBPlans. The OPA project coachresponsible for that region’s schoolboards also traveled with me, so thatthere were two of us to engage in mostof these meetings. We were there notonly to discuss the school board’s currentsuccesses and challenges, their visionsof what future success would look like,their emerging promising practices, andto see how they were progressing againsteach of the four project objectives 3 , butalso to answer questions or deal withany concerns that school boards mighthave. In addition, we took opportunities,as they became available, to share ideasthat we had gleaned from one schoolboard with another that was in a similarsituation.What a fulfilling, rewarding experiencethe monitoring was! Without exception,the process was profoundly positive.School boards came in to the meetingswith enthusiasm and energy and suchgratitude for this money that wasreserved for special education purposes.Many times we heard that schoolboards had seen the need for changesin their assessment processes, but withthe funding this project provided, theyfound they now had the additionalresources to do something about it.We heard about many of the stressorsfacing school boards, from decliningenrolment, to staffing shortages, to hiringdifficulties, to economic and financialfears, to travel times taking longer thanmeeting times, to high needs studentswith few community supports availablefor families, to transient populationswith staggering turnover figures … thelist goes on.But despite the many challenges thatwere described for us, we were struckby the creativity and thoughtfulness ofthe plans that school boards broughtforward to deal with the difficulties. Wewere amazed at the energy, dedicationand hard work of these people, most ofthem putting in hours for this project ontop of already overloaded full time jobsand many working concurrently on thisproject and several others.Also gratifying was finally meeting the“person attached to the voice.” We, ascoaches, had been communicating withschool board OPA team members forseveral months on the telephone and viaemail, and now we finally got to meet themin person. It was like seeing old friends.The monitoring meetings made us allrealize just how personal the relationshipswith school board team members hadbecome, and how important it is to buildtrust and real team relationships with ourschool board partners.One of the responsibilities of theMonitoring Lead was to write a reportthat would summarize the data gathered inthe monitoring meetings in a format thatwould be both accessible and meaningfulto school boards, but not unwieldy interms of length. A report entitled “Statusof School Board Assessment CapacityBuilding: Summary of School BoardMonitoring Responses: Provincial ViewApril - May 2007,” was produced andplaced on the OPA website. 4 This reportis an overall, provincial view of the resultsof the monitoring meetings and wasintended to be helpful to school boardsin moving forward with their AssessmentCapacity Building Plans. Also producedand placed on the OPA website were“segment reports” (i.e., small, medium,large, very large, French language, orNorthern school boards) where schoolboards could see what other similarschool boards had described during themonitoring meetings.Psychology Ontario 9

Moving ForwardSince the monitoring meetings last spring, each of us on the OPAproject team in our coaching role has worked with our school boardsas they prepared and submitted their June Reports, and as they morerecently prepared and submitted their updated Assessment CapacityBuilding Plans.The monitoring process this year will be different from that of lastyear. Rather than face-to-face monitoring meetings in the spring,school boards have just recently received a template from our teamoutlining the key results areas that they will be asked to report on andreturn to the OPA in May 2008. We coaches will be speaking withour school board colleagues around the reporting requirements tomeasure project success, offering suggestions, answering questions,continuing in our role as we help to ensure the success of everyschool board.SuccessIn this respect, my job as Monitoring Lead and as an OPA team coach, along with my four team member colleagues,isn’t very different from that of all the teachers, administrators, special education resource staff, professionalservices staff, and all those other individuals who work so diligently in schools to promote student success.Success. It’s what everyone wants. It’s what everyone needs. Despite all of the challenges facing school boardstoday, this project has shown us that positive changes supporting student success are not only possible, but alreadyhappening.(Footnotes)1Professional assessments include psychology, speech language pathology and occupational therapy assessments.2The Education Officers across Ontario had generously assisted us with the many complexities in arranging allthese monitoring meetings and also attended the meetings with us. Our friend and colleague in Thunder Bay,Bob Greer, actually drove us from school board to school board, making sure we had good food and wonderfulnorthern photo and shopping opportunities along the way.3The four project objectives are:(1) reduce wait times for students in Junior Kindergarten to Grade 4 requiring professional assessments,(2) enhance teacher capacity to provide effective programming for students provided with professionalassessments,(3) improve literacy / numeracy for students provided with professional assessments, and(4) sustain assessment process improvements for the long term.4www.psych.on.ca10 Psychology Ontario

What has the OPA Student AssessmentProject Meant for School PsychologyPractitioners in Ontario?Dr. Ian BrownChief Psychologist, Durham CatholicDistrict School BoardPresident, Association of ChiefPsychologists with Ontario SchoolThe following is a description of some of the ways in which the Student Assessment Project has been beneficialfor school board psychology practitioners. I am grateful to my fellow Chiefs for their comments whichconstitute the bulk of this article.1. Expanded role:This Project has raised the profile of psychological servicesstaff within school boards, (and in a more positive way thandid the ISA process of previous years). That is, it has helpedpsychologists to be further recognized as collaborativeand supportive of teachers’ efforts in the classroom. Weare seen as able to do much more than merely assessingstudents’ spelling or reading skills; that is, the perceptionof the role has expanded from that of “assessment jockey”to collaborative partner and consultant in realms of, andbeyond, psychometric assessment, including mentalhealth, autism, developmental disabilities, and a host ofother areas of student difficulty. In some boards, in fact,the number of referrals for psychological assessments hasdecreased, while there has been an increase in referrals forother services and supports. Psychological services staffare included on Board teams that address these issues.2. Increased staffing:The Project has in many cases provided for the hiring ofadditional staff (psychologists, psychological associates,and psychometrists), where it was possible to successfullyrecruit qualified individuals. Some boards have found itdifficult to recruit staff, due to the significant shortage ofqualified school psychology personnel in the province,a condition which will be exacerbated when a numberof us retire in the next few years. This Project hasprovided opportunities for new graduates, those undersupervised practice, and doctoral interns, as well as someveterans who came to the Nirvana of school boards fromother areas of psychological practice. Some Boards arecontracting out assessments to private practitioners soregular board staff can be more involved with follow upof recommendations in the classroom, while another isworking with universities to recruit, train, and eventuallyhire additional staff.3. Wait lists and wait times:For the school boards where students were waiting a longtime for psychological assessments, the waiting time hasbeen reduced. Similarly, the list of students waiting for apsychological assessment has decreased. A significant number(in the thousands) of additional professional assessments ofstudents in JK to Grade Four, which would otherwise not havebeen completed, will be, as a result of this Project, to the benefitof those students, their teachers, and their parents.4. Pre-referral process:Many Boards have improved their pre-referral procedures,including the adoption of pre-assessment screening practices,and engaging classroom teachers in all steps of the process.A tiered approach that emphasizes consultation with teachingstaff before making referrals for professional assessments isin place in some Boards. Others have made improvements intheir referral forms and school support team processes, andincreased face-to-face conversation with classroom teachersduring the course of the assessment process about needsfor programming purposes. Psychology staff have assistedschool-based teams in problem-solving for students whoare encountering significant difficulties; the discussions arefocused and productive.5. Assessment practices:Some Boards have adopted a universal screening processto identify SK and Grade One students at risk for readingproblems. These children receive a battery of readingrelated processing tests (phonemic awareness, memory, etc.).Results are shared with the classroom teacher and a readingteam at the schools; advice is provided on differentiatedPsychology Ontario 11

OPA – The Speech-LanguagePathology Experience: " NewOpportunities for Collaboration"Susan Menary, M.Sc, Reg. CASLPOChief Speech-Language PathologistAutism LeadToronto Catholic District School BoardThe OPA project underway in school boards across Ontario has provided new opportunities for collaboration andinnovation among Psychology staff, Speech-Language Pathologists (SLPs) and school based staff. This collaborationhas common themes of using a proactive, rather than a reactive approach, a team approach to assessment, and evidencebased interventions, but has taken many forms, and includes the following examples:Greater Essex District School Board:The SLP has developed strong partnerships in the Board’s initiative. This has included training for the SLP andPsychologist by the creators of the Dynamic Indicators of Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS). They have since trained allLearning Support, Literacy and Numeracy Support, senior kindergarten and grade one teachers. This assessment toolhas been administered by both school teams to all senior kindergarten and grade one students in two pilot schools. Usinga Response To Intervention model (RTI), both school teams are using evidence-based interventions, including resourcesand manipulatives targeting oral vocabulary and language, phonemic awareness, and alphabetic principle, with the SLPoverseeing the implementation and capacity building. School teams have received inservicing regarding RTI, includingassessments, interventions, tiers of support, progress monitoring, and utilizing outcome driven data.Waterloo Catholic District School BoardThe SLP and Psychologist co-lead the project. The board has targetedenhancement of team assessment of complex cases JK to grade 2, witha consideration of extension to Grade 4 for the last part of the process.The board has also developed a pilot process for joint team observation.To free SLPs to participate more fully in these endeavors, backfillassessments have been provided.Peel District School Board:SLPs with Peel are involved in and support a variety of activities throughthe OPA pilot using a three tier approach based on the Education for Alldocument. These include:* Phonemic Awareness* Phonics* Fluency* Volcabulary* Text Comprehension• Assessments of Individual students (2 SLPs)• Sound Skills K and grade 1 binders for all schools, as well as a Board wide presentation• Schools Attuned 1 training for all staff• Language for the Early Years Program (this is similar to Hanen for school boards) for K and grade one teachers, andteachers of kindergarten language classes, as well as primary general learning disabilities classes. A half-time SLP isresponsible for the training• Literacy Booster: a joint program run in three schools with the SLP/grade 1 teachers and early literacy teachers, with afocus on students at risk• Empower 2 : used in 3 schools with the Hospital for Sick Children• Project with English Language Learner (ELL) students, and use of tools to help identify needs• Review and writing teams to look at the criteria for contained communication classes (related to the special educationhandbook).Psychology Ontario 13

Toronto Catholic District School Board:The goals of the OPA project are being piloted in 4 demonstration sites. These schools have enhanced levels ofPsychology, SLP and Special Education support, with a focus on: enhancements to the assessment process, evidencebased interventions, and building capacity and sustainability. The project has undertaken the following initiatives:• The development of a student profile when discussing students at team meetings• Professional development on Education for All and differentiated instruction• Coordination of team assessments and possible joint reporting• Evidence based approaches to instruction and intervention, including Empower, JUMP Math, the Web-BasedTeaching Tool, and early literacy and phonological awareness intervention programs.In addition, there is a system focus on addressing the backlog of Psychology and SLP assessments.York Catholic District School Board:A full time SLP has been devoted to the OPA project to work in collaborationwith a psychologist, occupational therapist and teacher. The focus of activitiesincludes:• Addressing the assessment backlog• Participation on the board’s Capacity Building Team• Attending related workshops• Participation in development of an OPA Model Lesson to be piloted in 15schools incorporating: Guided Reading, Phonological Awareness, SightWords, Working with Words (phonics, vocabulary, comprehension)• Promotion of Sound Skills (and other) PA programsEVIDENCEBASEDPRACTICEINSPEECHPATHOLOGY• Provision of in-service on OPA model to selected schools - development of literacy recommendations specific tospeech and language.Upper Grand District School Board:The Chief Psychologist and Coordinator of Speech-Language Pathology co-lead the project. A three pronged approachis being used to support differentiated instruction through assessment for programming rather than for diagnosis. Thefocus is on early identification (not IPRC) of students at risk for Learning Disabilities/Language Impairment. High needsstudents will continue to receive supports already in place. The following are the activities that are taking place:• JK- Grade 1 students: receive a joint one day assessment by Psychologist and SLP. By end of the day, thereport is completed, 2 - 3 goals set and written into Individual Education Plan, and feedback with school andparent is conducted.• Enhanced Consultant Support Team Meetings: All Psychology, SLP and Special Education staff received trainingin Schools Attuned. This provides a common language for discussion, problem solving, and goal setting atteams. The aim is to reduce the need for formal assessment and focus on program rather than diagnosis.• Grades 2 – 4: When formal assessment is required, joint SLP and Psychology assessments are considered.Follow-up meeting(s) with teachers are conducted to model how to support strategies in classroom, using videosdeveloped by the OPA team from school board classrooms. In addition, resources are provided from a binderdeveloped by the OPA team.Challenges within the OPA Project:There are provincial shortages of SLPs and challenges have occurred when hiring staffmembers that are temporary or part-time. Some school boards have needed to re-adjusttheir current staffing complements to participate on the project. However, in spite of theseshortages, the OPA project has provided opportunities for professionals to work togethercreatively and collaboratively accross Ontario school boards.(Footnotes)1A professional development and service delivery program (based on the principles of All Kinds of Minds),that assists K-12 educators in using neurodevelopmental content in their classrooms to create success inlearning and provide hopeand satisfaction for all students.2A program for students with reading difficulties, developed by the Hospital for Sick Children LearningDisabilities Research Program14 Psychology Ontario

The 2005 report, Education ForAll, Report of the Expert Panel onLiteracy and Numeracy Instructionfor Students with Special EducationNeeds, Kindergarten to Grade Six,emphasized that knowledge about astudent’s strengths and learning needshelps teachers to provide effectiveprogramming. This should be thegoal of every teacher. The followingquote is taken from the documentEducation For All. “The assessmentprocess is multidisciplinary, andoccurs in a continuous cycle that isfully integrated into the learningteachingprocess: at the outset ofwork; as work progresses; and at theconclusion to any work. It is alsomulti-tiered, beginning and endingwith the classroom teacher andleading to an ongoing evolution ofeffective instruction, reassessment,and access to opportunities forachievement based on changingstudent needs.” (Salvia, 1990) Thiscontinuous assessment cycle buildsupon the process recommendedin all Ministry of Educationdocuments from expert panel reportsto the Special Education Guidefor Educators. This continuousassessment process is fundamental tothe success and sustainability of theOntario Psychological Association(OPA) Student Assessment Project.The OPA project is based on thecontinuous assessment processmodel as described in Education ForAll. The objectives of this projectare to: (i) reduce current wait timesfor students in junior kindergartento grade 4 requiring professionalassessments. (ii) enhance teachercapacity to provide effectiveprogramming for students providedwith professional assessments, (iii)improve literacy and numeracy forstudents provided with professionalassessments, and (iv) sustain theseassessment process improvements forthe long term.MakingtheGRADE…from thePerspective of aSuperintendentAs a Superintendent of Educationwith responsibility for specialeducation programs and services,I strongly support the goals of thisproject. Wait times are taken intoconsideration as staffing levels aredetermined within the parametersof the funding available. Thefocus of the OPA project on juniorkindergarten to grade four studentshas prompted school boards toexamine their assessment practicesand assessment tools. Psychologydepartments and Speech Languagedepartments have undertaken gapanalysis through inventory reviews toidentify areas of need. This projecthas provided the means for boardsto acquire the necessary resources.Our professional assessment staffnow has an enhanced bank ofresources to be utilized with studentsin the targeted grade range of thisproject. However, caution mustbe exercised when consideringassessment for young children. Theprofessional assessment is not afix for the problem. Professionalservice assessments should notreplace differentiated instruction anduniversal design. StrategiesNumeracyMarie ParsonsSuperintendent of Education(Special Education)Avon Maitland District School Boardand their effectiveness within thedifferentiated instruction modeland the concepts of universaldesign allow for best practicesin assessment of learningand assessment for learningas precursors. Professionalassessments should be the finalstep after teacher diagnosticassessment and observation.Precise and creative examplesof good teaching must precedeformalized professional assessment.Assessments are the mechanism forteachers to complete the puzzle of achild’s learning.The power of assessmentreports lies not in the actualassessment tools and the scores,but in how the classroomteacher understands and canimplement the recommendations.Recommendations must be writtenin language that parents/guardiansand teachers understand and canimplement. Special educationdepartments must consider thetraining needs of the membersPsychology Ontario 15

of their psychology and speech language teamswho will provide them with further informationon writing reports with recommendations that canbe interpreted and implemented by teachers. Nota lot of time has been spent on building capacityof classroom teachers to interpret and implementrecommendations. Teachers must be able tocommunicate with parents/guardians so that there isa clear understanding of how the recommendationswill impact the programming for the student inthe classroom. This project has resulted in theexpansion of our school-based consultation model.Special Education Consultants are more focusedin their dialogue with school teams followingassessment feedbacks. Discussions relate to thereview of specific report recommendations and howto translate these recommendations into classroomprogramming and instructional strategies andpractices.We all share the goal of improved studentachievement. Classroom teachers focus onimproving literacy and numeracy for all studentsincluding students with special education needs.Teachers must use universal design for learning anddifferentiated instruction to meet the needs of allstudents. Teachers have to consider the strategies,and the accommodations and/or modifications thatmay by necessary for specific students. In orderto make these decisions, the school team needsdata. The professional assessment is one piece ofdata that can assist in the proper programming forthese students. However, once again, it must bestressed that other pieces of data are also equallyas important. Special education departmentsshould give thought to the training of professionalassessment staff in high yield teaching strategies forliteracy and numeracy. A deeper understanding ofthe high yield strategies will allow professional staffto embed the strategies in their conversations withand recommendations to classroom teachers andparents/guardians. It is critical that all professionalsspeak the same language when focusing onimproved student achievement. This will also serveto ensure sustainability over the long term.will be the sustainability of these process improvementsover the long term. As Superintendents work withspecial education departments to review their programsand services within the framework of the OPA project,thought must be given not only to how they will supportcurrent classroom teachers, but also how they will buildthe capacity of new teachers. Wait times have beenreduced, but the challenge for school boards will beto maintain the reduced wait times within the specialeducation budget parameters.One of my favourite sayings (framed and hanging on myoffice wall) is that “all students can learn and succeed,but not on the same day in the same way” (WilliamG. Spady). Parents/guardians place their trust in alleducators to program for their children so that theyachieve to the best of their ability. Classroom teachersneed assistance with this important task. Belief #6of Education For All states that “classroom teachersneed the support of the larger community to createa learning environment that supports students withspecial education needs”. Teachers need the support ofadministration, school-based special education resourceteachers, other classroom teachers, coordinators andconsultants and other professional staff. The OPAproject has provided school boards with the meansand the framework to closely examine this networkof support and as a result, to strengthen their existingsupports for the benefit of all students. This will ensurethat all students can learn and succeed.The OPA project has provided the opportunityfor school boards to focus on building capacity ofclassroom teachers to use the recommendationsfrom assessment reports to guide their practice inprogramming appropriately for students with specialeducation needs. The challenge for school boards16 Psychology Ontario

The OPA Student Assessment Project:A French School Board's PerspectiveDr. Guy GignacPsychologue superviseurConseil scolaire de district des écoles catholique du Sud-OuestAs a psychologist for the Conseil scolaire de district des écoles catholiquesdu Sud-Ouest, I have been invited to share my experiences and perspectivesregarding the Student Assessment Project overseen by the OntarioPsychological Association (OPA). I have gathered some feedback fromother members of French school boards, as well as other people who are closely involved in this project. As a French schoolboard, we experience different challenges in participating in the OPA project. One challenge is not as much related to thelanguage, but to the small size of the board and the vast region it covers. There are many initiatives being launched by theMinistry, yet we remain limited in the human resources available to us. Therefore, the same people are involved in severalprojects at the same time. To meet these challenges, our board has created a new position and this person will be in charge ofcoordinating special projects. In our board, there is one certified psychologist with two psychometrists. As the OPA projectwas launched, one of our psychometrists went on a maternity leave. Our efforts trying to replace her have been unsuccessfulso far. That leads to another particular challenge, which is the lack of qualified professionals who can perform psychological,as well as speech and language assessment, in French, not to mention a vast territory that each person must cover. We havebeen fortunate to find one psychological associate who was willing to perform psychological assessments on a contractualbasis, but that person is also employed full time elsewhere, thus limiting the number of assessments that can be done. Wehave also reorganized the speech and language services department to optimize the available resources. We have developedmore precise guidelines regarding the speech and language services and we are looking into a more integrated model ofpsychological, speech and language, and special education services.Despite the lack of human resources, we have succeeded in lowering our wait time for a professional assessment in the firstyear of the project. We intend to maintain that trend by continuing contractual hiring and by using our own staff during thesummer. In my opinion, the success of the projet is linked not only to the number of assessments done, but also to otherimportant initiatives that the project has allowed our school board to undertake. One of those initiatives is the identification ofdifficulties at an early age, between junior kindergarten and grade four. Interventions can be implemented, therefore, preventingthe occurrence of more serious academic problems at a later age. Early identification and intervention could prevent the needfor further psychological, speech and language or occupational assessments and services. To achieve this, our psychologicaland speech and language staff are working more closely with teachers and special educational consultants. A concertedeffort by all is also necessary to ensure that the language of professional reports is understood and that recommendations aretranslated into well designed interventions for the classroom. The efficiency of the interventions will be closely monitored bythe team to better meet the needs of the assessed students. A good communication among all parties is, therefore, essentialfor the success of the initiatives put forth by our school board.The early identification of difficulties in students is also affected by the availability of assessment instruments in French.Not so long ago, there were very few valuable standardized instruments in French in Ontario. It seems that this situation isevolving and more instruments are now available. The OPA funding allowed us to buy more psychometric instruments thatcan be used for early identification.The sustainability and the success of this project also depends on the teachers’ capacity to implement efficient strategies. Inaddition to the direct consultations with teachers and school staff, we are planning to offer workshops to better understandthe needs of the students having received a professional assessment.Finally, I would like to share my opinion that an extension of the project beyond the two year period and for another targetedgroup of students, such as the students in the transitional years between elementary and high school, would be beneficial.Also, an integrated approach on the part of the Ministry level would contribute to the boards’ efficiency in dispensing qualityinitiatives for the success of all students.Psychology Ontario 17

It's A Whole New WorldClosing the Gap for Isolated SchoolAuthoritiesJim WhiteSupervisory Officer, Moosonee District School BoardNEOSA OPA Project LeadStudents in the North Eastern Ontario School Authorities (NEOSA) are making gains through the Ontario PsychologicalAssociation Student Assessment Capacity Building Project. Twelve school authorities in the north eastern region of Ontariohave joined forces to provide better opportunities for our students to be successful. The OPA Student Assessment CapacityBuilding Project is one of many initiatives the North Eastern Ontario School Authorities has undertaken to improve studentachievement in the past few years. This project has enabled our schools to virtually eliminate a backlog of referrals forpsychological assessment. It is providing our teachers with better assessment tools and improved assessment and instructionalstrategies, which will especially benefit our higher needs students.NEOSA is comprised of twelve school authorities:Airy & Sabine District School Area BoardAsquith-Garvey District School Area BoardFoleyet District School Area BoardGogama District School Area BoardJames Bay Lowlands Secondary School BoardMissarenda District School Area BoardMoose Factory Island District School Area BoardMoosonee District School Area BoardMoosonee Roman Catholic Separate School BoardMurchison & Lyell District School Area BoardParry Sound Roman Catholic Separate School BoardPenetanguishene Protestant Separate School BoardWhitney, OntarioShining Tree, OntarioFoleyet, OntarioGogama, OntarioMoosonee, OntarioMissanabie, OntarioMoose Factory, OntarioMoosonee, OntarioMoosonee, OntarioMadawaska, OntarioParry Sound, OntarioPenetanguishene, OntarioOur school authorities are spread over a wide geographical area. Those in the Moosonee/Moose Factory region near the JamesBay coast are hundreds of kilometers from other school authorities, such as those in Parry Sound and Penetanguishene onGeorgian Bay, Madawaska and Whitney, south of Algonquin Park, or the Foleyet,Gogama, Shining Tree, Missanabie schools spread throughout remote areas ofnorthern Ontario. Some school authorities are located on major highways and closeto larger towns, while others have no highway connection and may be accessibleonly by air or rail. Moose Factory, located on an island in the Moose River deltaon the James Bay coast, is accessible by water taxi in the summer, ice road in thewinter, and by helicopter only, during spring break up or fall freeze up.School Authorities are typically “single school” school boards and mostly serveelementary students. James Bay Lowlands Secondary School Board serves onlysecondary students. Gogama District School Area Boards serves mostly elementarystudents, but provides opportunities for students to obtain online secondary schoolcredits. Some of our school authorities are very small, having only one teacher anda handful of students. Other school authorities are quite large in comparison. Ourlargest school authority has approximately 350 students, and a proportional numberof teachers and educational assistants to deliver the educational program. Some ofour school authorities have an enrollment which is almost entirely aboriginal. In theMoosonee/Moose Factory region, many students study Cree as a second language,in addition to studying French as a second language.18 Psychology Ontario

Under the Education Act, schoolauthorities are responsible for providingeducation for students, in the same way asdistrict school boards. School authoritiesin Ontario are provincially funded. Eachschool authority is governed by its ownelected board of trustees. Each developsits own set of polices to determine howbusiness is done and how education willbe provided to its students. Each schoolauthority is accountable to the Ministryof Education, and to the community itserves.Although school authorities operate insimilar ways as district school boards,there are many huge differences. Supportservice infrastructure is minimal.We do not have program consultantsor coordinators, psychologists orpsychometrists, speech and languagepathologists, behaviour therapists or anyof the other usual support professionalsthat one may find in a district schoolboard. School authorities usually arerequired to hire the services of privateprofessionals or rely on professionalservices provided by provincially fundedagencies. Such services are often difficultto acquire in a timely manner due tohigh demands for such service and thehigh cost of transportation to bring theseservices to some very remote areas ofthe province. For some of our schoolauthorities, it requires three days for aprofessional service provider to provideone day of service, if one includes traveltime.The challenges for school authoritiesto provide specialized services toour higher needs students are many.Geography is huge, demographics arediverse, transportation costs are high, andinfrastructure is minimal. We often haveto think “outside the box” to discover ourown solutions. We are often forgottenbecause of our smallness and remotenessand have to be proactive in order to getessential services for our students. Wenetwork with each other and providesupport to each other through the NEOSAalliance. We advocate for the students inthe school authorities to make sure theydo not get left behind.In January, 2007, the Moosonee DistrictSchool Area Board submitted a projectproposal to the Ontario PsychologicalAssociation on behalf of the other schoolauthorities within NEOSA. Approvalof our project meant we would have abudget to hire a coordinator to develop aneeds assessment, develop an action planand report progress. We needed answersto such questions as:How many students were onwait lists for professionalassessments?What kind of assessmentinstruments currently existed inour schools?Which assessment instrumentsdid we need to acquire for ourschools?What training did teachersneed in order to use thesesassessment tools?What training did teachersneed to be able to link teachingstrategies with assessmentresults?The answers to these questions providedimportant information to guide thedevelopment of our action plan and howthe project would move forward.To date, the backlog of referralsfor psychological assessments hasbeen eliminated. We have had 43psychological assessments completedto date through this project. We arevery pleased with this accomplishment,but are concerned that if we don’t dothings differently in the future than wehave in the past, we are only going toaccumulate another backlog of referralswithin a year or two. To prevent this fromhappening, our action plan containedthree components to achieve an effectiveearly identification and interventionprogram for our students: Acquisition of good assessmentinstruments that can be usedwith our JK-2 students to screenfor students who may be at riskof failure, and identify areas ofstudent need; In-service for JK-2 teachers tohelp them make effective use ofthese assessment instruments; Train teachers on how to provideeffective instruction based onassessments.We are currently working through ouraction plan. The OPA Student AssessmentCapacity Building Project criteriastipulate that all activities in our planmust be completed by August 31, 2008.Our end goal is to develop our teachersso that they will be more self-reliant. Wewant them to be skilled in assessing thelearning needs of high needs students anddetermining the kinds of instructionalstrategies that will benefit them. We wantour teachers to be able to make betterdecisions about which students need tobe referred to outside professionals forassessment and/or consultation. Finally,we want to build stronger bridges withour partner agencies and the professionalcommunity. Having done these things,we hope to have increased our capacityto provide only the best programs for thestudents in the North Eastern Ontarioschool authorities.We have developed some valuablepartnerships which have greatlycontributed to the success of our studentassessment capacity building project.NEOSA would like to acknowledgethe support of the Learning DisabilitiesAssociation of Ontario in providingtraining to our staff on the Web BasedTeaching Tool. We would like toacknowledge the support from Huron-Superior Catholic District School Boardfor providing support in development ofspeech and language screening tools andinstructional strategies. We would liketo thank the Robarts/Amethyst schoolin London, Ontario, and Trillium schoolin Milton, Ontario (both ProvincialDemonstration Schools) for providingsupport with computer-based assistivetechnology. Finally, we would liketo express our appreciation to theOntario Psychological Association forits continued support throughout thisproject.Psychology Ontario 19

Partnering Together To Improve LivesThrough AssessmentWechsler Fundamentals:Academic Skills—Canadian (WF:AS CDN )A new Canadian Achievementtest to screen academic progressin students.NEPSY—Second Edition(NEPSY-II)A new customizable measureof neurocognitive processes inchildren and adolescents.Process Assessmentof the Learner—SecondEdition: Diagnosis forReading, Writing andMath (PAL–II)A new comprehensive andevidence-based assessmentinterventionsystem for reading,writing and math.Wechsler NonverbalScale of Ability:Canadian (WNV CDN )A nonverbal measure of abilityfor all individuals. Especiallydesigned for culturally andlinguistically diverse groups.For more information please contact us at 1-866-335-8418or visit our website at www.PsychCorp.ca.Ontario Psychological Association • 730 Yonge St., Suite #221, Toronto, ON M4Y 2B7Tel: 416.961.5552 • Fax: 416.961.5516 • www.psych.on.ca