1. TDSB Deaf and Hard of Hearing Programs Program Area Review Team (PART)

2. History of the Process  Resource Team and staff meetings identified issues of concern  Coordinator presented an overview of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Programs to TDSB Central Feasibility panel in 2006, highlighting issues of concern  Motion approved by SEAC in October 2008 and then approved by the TDSB in November 2008 for a Program Area Review Team (PART)

3.  This is a community consultation process that will assist the TDSB in developing the most detailed, accurate picture possible of student program and enrolment needs for the present and into the future  The PART membership will examine this ‘picture’ and make recommendations on how we can better serve our students’ needs Program Area Review Team

4. Purpose Tonight PART membership recommendations: 3 models of program delivery will be proposed Feedback: Which models are best options for our students?

5. Motivators for the PART  Transitions for Deaf and Hard of Hearing students in Intensive Support Programs (ISP)  Transportation issues for students in ISP’s  Pathways for Deaf and Hard of Hearing students  Support services for Deaf and Hard of Hearing students

6. Transition Issues  In April 2008: TDSB’s goal is to move towards a K-8 delivery model for elementary schools  Elementary Deaf and Hard of Hearing students can change schools up to 4 - 5 times by secondary school  Transitions can occur at grades 1, 3, 5, and 8  Deaf and Hard of Hearing secondary students can attend three different sites

7. Transportation Issues  Handouts  Of the 100 TDSB students who travel the greatest distance by bus, 20% constitute Deaf and Hard of Hearing students  60% of DHOH students travel over 10 km each way to their programs  Scattermap – No one solution to the problem

8. Pathways  Pathways to promote student success  Equity of Access  Community of learners  Building peer groups  Professional development  Program Options  Flexible and creative  Integration

9. Proposed Models  Three models  Status Quo  MODEL A  MODEL B

10. Preschool Program 16 EA Signing 17 SLF 10 EA EA Totals: Oral Signing Oral / Sign support Deaf Plus Legend: STATUS QUO - Deaf/Hard of Hearing– Feb. 2009 Briarcrest Deaf Plus Forest Hill Bridlewood Davisville/MTSD Grades K-8 4 SLF Danforth CTI Itinerant Program Grades K - 2 Grades 3-4 Grades 5-8 Preschool Grades 5 to 8 Grades K-4 Northern SS Wexford PS Drewry Dublin Hgts. Rippleton JK/SK (Itin) Pelmo PK JK/SK (Itin) Pre school

11. Status Quo - PROS Minimal or no changes needed to program locations Continuity of class space and locations Itinerant Hearing Dept. and Resource staff remain centralized

12. Status Quo - PROS Davisville PS /MTSD, Drewry SS are retrofitted for DHOH and have equipment that will benefit DHOH Some programs are centrally located and close to a TTC stop Current schools administrators, staff and students have experience with DHOH students and their issues and accommodations

13. Status Quo - CONS Some schools are not accessible sites e.g. for students with mobility issues Some students will have to travel long distances on the bus Some students will have several transitions to programs due to the number of sites

14. Status Quo - CONS No flexibility for changes in student or staff numbers Some students and teachers are isolated and have little peer support One location for all elementary students who use sign language

15. MODEL A and B Consolidation of Programs / Services Consolidation of locations for Deaf and Hard of Hearing elementary self-contained programs Choice: Three sites: East/West/Central or One central site Consolidation of the two secondary programs Consideration of elementary site for sign language users Choice: Either Central, or One site

16. MODEL A and B Continued access to specialized programming (Drewry SS; Rippleton/Pelmo Park) Continue to maintain a central Itinerant office and decentralized Itinerant support services on site at schools throughout all quadrants Consideration of a one or two site service delivery model for some of the families in the Parent Guidance Program

17. Proposed - MODEL A Deaf MID WEST PS-8 EAST PS-8 Oral Signing Oral / Sign support Deaf Plus Legend: Itinerant Program Preschool Program Secondary Central K-8 Rippleton JK/SK (Itin) Pelmo Park- JK/SK (Itin) Pre school

18. MODEL A - PROS Enhanced capacity to share resource staff (i.e. Educational Assistants, Sign Language Facilitators, Speech Language Pathologist, Audiologist, Social Worker) Enhanced capacity for flexible, diagnostic and creative programming Ability to retrofit classes and schools

19. MODEL A - PROS Flexibility: Able to better handle short term changes in number of students and staff Less transportation issues (i.e. time and behaviors) Effective and efficient use of space Equity of access (fully accessible site)

20. MODEL A - PROS Continued access to specialized programming (Drewry SS/ Rippleton and Pelmo Park) Fewer transitions for Hard of Hearing students in self-contained classrooms Increased opportunities for ongoing peer support Possible increase in integration into regular programs

21. MODEL A - PROS Teachers would be part of a larger team Parents have a larger support group Students would have larger peer group More access to materials/resources

22. MODEL A - CONS Finding space for several classes Will not solve all transportation issues Leaving established schools and friendships with staff Physical move

23. MODEL A - CONS Central site needs to be an accessible site e.g. for students with mobility issues Students may have to travel further since it has the only programs for elementary signing students Finding a location for Coordinator for DHOH, Audiologist, Technician, (Speech Resource teacher), Central Itinerant and Itinerant Dept. including Parent Guidance Program

24. Proposed - MODEL B Deaf MID Single site PS-8 Oral Signing Oral / Sign support Deaf Plus Legend: Itinerant Program Preschool Program Secondary Pelmo Park- JK/SK (Itin) Rippleton JK/SK (Itin) Pre school Secondary

25. MODEL B - PROS Enhanced capacity to share resource staff (i.e. Educational Assistants, Sign Language Facilitators, Speech Language Pathologist, Audiologist, Social Worker) Fewer transitions for Hard of Hearing students in self-contained classrooms Community of Learners (students, teachers, support staff); stronger sense of community.

26. MODEL B - PROS Ability to retrofit classes and school Flexibility: Able to better handle short term changes in number of students and staff Effective and efficient use of space Equity of access (fully accessible site)

27. MODEL B - PROS Teachers would be part of a larger team (networking, professional development) Parents have a larger support group Socialization - students would have larger peer group More access to materials/resources

28. MODEL B - PROS Continued access to specialized programming (Drewry SS/ Rippleton and Pelmo Park) Increased opportunities for ongoing peer support Integration into regular programs is vital in this model

29. MODEL B - CONS Finding space for several classes Must-haves : Location should be north and central, near major highways, accessible, and large enough to accommodate approximately 19 classes. Local student population to provide opportunities for integration. Administration committed to integration. Need for space for support staff such as social worker, speech teacher, speech pathologist, audiologist. Will not solve all transportation issues

30. MODEL B - CONS Integration would be difficult given large numbers of students. Finding a location for Central Itinerant and Itinerant Dept. including Parent Guidance Program Coordinator for DHOH, Audiologist, Technician, Speech Resource teacher. Physical move

31. ITINERANT DEPT. Centralized co-ordination of the Itinerant and Parent Guidance Program enhances delivery of professional development and sharing of resource materials Supports and facilitates efficient management of intake referrals and FM amplification equipment, providing benefits to students in terms of best practices and speedy timelines

32. Itinerant numbers

33. Itinerant numbers by quadrant

34. Thank you !