Directorate of Ontario



Download 1.92 Mb.
Page1/35
Date26.04.2017
Size1.92 Mb.
#16584
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   35


Accessibility

Directorate of Ontario


Research Services –

Accessibility in Education

Final Report

August 12, 2015

MANAGEMENT CONSULTING

Contents


Directorate of Ontario 1

1Executive Summary 3

2Introduction 3

3Jurisdictional Scan and Analysis 3

4Education Jurisdictional Scan 4

5Literature Review 5

6Emerging Trends and Issues 5

7Industry Leaders and Experts 6

8Leading Practices 6

9Conclusion 7

10Introduction 7

11Jurisdictional Scan – Education 13

13Literature Review 42

14Administrative barriers between government organizations and the need for improved coordination. 43

15The need for a holistic approach in education. 45

16Higher barriers to learning STEM subjects 47

17Access to online resources 47

18Conclusion 50

19Emerging Trends and Issues 50

20Putting the Individual First 51

21Targeted Financial Support: Grants, Specialized Programs/ Streams and Individual Loan Programs 52

22Defining and implementing reasonable accommodations 54

23Technology (web accessibility, use in classroom and training for assistive technologies) 55

24Industry Leaders and Experts 55

25Carleton University 55

26Canadian Disability Policy Alliance 56

27People for Education 56

28Easter Seals Ontario 57

29The Learning Disabilities Association of Ontario 57

30Inclusive Education Canada 58

31Peter Chaban 58

32Heather Willis 59

33Dr. Gary Bunch 59

34Community Living Ontario 59

35Cheryl M. Jorgensen, Ph.D. 60

36The Inclusive Design Research Centre, OCAD University 61

37Transitions and Inclusive Environments Lab (TRAIL) 61

38Leading Practices 62

39Inclusive Education Practices 62

40Extended Schooling 64

41Regulations and Standards against Bullying 65

42Data Collection 66

43Conclusion 66

44References 67

45Appendix – Research Findings 76

46Alberta 97

47British Columbia 109

48Manitoba 124

49New Brunswick 131

50Newfoundland and Labrador 136

51Nova Scotia 142

52Northwest Territories 154

53Nunavut 160

54Grants and Loans 161

55Prince Edward Island 163

56Quebec 178

57Saskatchewan 189

58Yukon 196

59US 200

60Arizona 215

61California 223

62New York 230

63Australia 236

64Germany 261

65New Zealand 280

66Singapore 291

67Spain 321

68Sweden 332

69UK 341

Contact Us 353


1Executive Summary

2Introduction


The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 (AODA) provides accessibility standards for both private and public sectors, with a goal to make Ontario accessible by 2025. The Accessibility Directorate of Ontario (ADO) was established to manage the implementation of the AODA by developing and enforcing the current accessibility standards. Legislation requires that the effectiveness of the regulations, standards and policies be reviewed every four years and that all the standards be reviewed by a Standards Development Committee within five years of being enacted in regulation. The ADO intends to begin the review of the Transportation Standard in 2015.

In order to meet current commitments and ensure accessibility for all Ontarians is achieved by 2025, the Ontario government has begun to shift focus to areas where the current standards can be improved, as well as areas where new standards need to be assessed and developed in order for barriers to be removed and the overall goals of the AODA reached. Supported by the Minister’s 2014 Mandate Letter, developing new standards in the areas of Healthcare and Education was identified throughout the Moran review’s consultation process and serves as one of the report’s final recommendations.

The purpose of this Final Report is to summarize and analyze the results of secondary research gathered by KPMG LLP for an engagement with the Accessibility Directorate of Ontario (ADO) on accessibility in the transportation, healthcare and education sectors. The research questions guiding this project were:


  1. How are other jurisdictions or leading organizations working to make public sector transportation and taxi services more accessible to people with disabilities?

  2. How are other jurisdictions or leading organizations working to make healthcare more accessible to people with disabilities?

  3. How are other jurisdictions or leading organizations working to make education more accessible to people with disabilities?

  4. What barriers to accessibility have been identified in the areas of healthcare and education, broadly defined?

The research and analysis included in this Final Report is focused on the education sector. Please see corresponding Final Reports on the transportation and healthcare sectors.

3Jurisdictional Scan and Analysis


In total, 24 jurisdictions were examined to determine how they are making education more accessible to people with disabilities. Examples from other jurisdictions were also included if specific programs were identified to be unique or a leading practice.

4Education Jurisdictional Scan


Canada (Federal)

British Columbia

Alberta

Saskatchewan



Manitoba

Quebec


New Brunswick

Nova Scotia

Newfoundland

P.E.I


Yukon

Northwest Territory

Nunavut

United States (Federal)



Arizona

California

New York

Australia Germany

New Zealand

Singapore

Spain

Sweden


United Kingdom

As part of the jurisdictional scan, regulations, standards, policies, and programs were reviewed that support equitable access and service. The scope of this scan included, but was not limited to, education service providers, post-secondary institutions, government programs, and non-governmental organizations. Compared to other jurisdictions, Ontario seems to be on par or better than other jurisdictions examined, as it relates to regulatory requirements and standards to help make education more accessible to persons with disabilities. Most of the other jurisdictions in this review have similar regulations to Ontario, requiring the accommodation of students with disabilities that allow them to attend mainstream schools and classes. Ontario further appears to be among the leading jurisdictions in providing policies and strategic initiatives to help make education more accessible to persons with disabilities. Similar to Ontario, other jurisdictions have accessibility plans, disability strategies, action plans, and equal access policies in place. Furthermore, Ontario offers comparable grants and loans to those offered throughout Canada. Some other jurisdictions offer interesting allowance programs, which are detailed in the body of this report.


5Literature Review


This report examined the barriers encountered by people with disabilities to education, including accessibility and equity of service barriers. In education, seven overarching healthcare barriers were found. These barriers result in difficulties navigating the healthcare system, distrust in healthcare providers leading to safety risks and poorer healthcare for the patient. The review included exploring sources from academic literature, as well as a range of organizations including advocacy groups, policy institutes, government committees and panels, industry organizations, and human rights and disability organizations.

In education, five main barriers were found. These barriers impact students’ ability to obtain meaningful education and create limits on the depth of information that students can obtain in their studies. Although in Canada, the US, and UK there are legislation and regulations to ensure equal access to education, many of the necessary facets often fall short and these regulations are not always met with compliance. Additionally, as technology advances, new barriers are emerging. Web accessibility has received focus in recent years, but more needs to be done. The internet, university library webpages, and online resources will continue to grow as central components to university education. Solutions have been found to decrease some barriers through the implementation of individualized learning plants to meet the specific needs of each students, yet the real life implementation of these plans has been difficult. The review highlights concerns from parents, educators, advocates, and academics seeking to find solutions.


6Emerging Trends and Issues


Education in Ontario aims to provide a student-focused, results-driven, integrated, and sustainable system for all. Trends and emerging issues in accessibility in education were identified based on jurisdictional research, other publicly-available documents and literature review. In total four trends or emerging issues have been identified. Most are rooted in the principles of inclusion and accommodation and aim to address barriers that impede system and individual success. The trends and issues were:

Putting the individual first

Targeted Financial Support: Grants, Specialized Programs/ Streams and Individual Loan Programs

Defining and implementing reasonable accommodations

Technology (web accessibility, use in classroom and training for assistive technologies)

7Industry Leaders and Experts


This report also identifies industry leaders and experts in accessible education. These profiles were compiled using secondary web based research. Leaders, experts, academics, institutes, consumer groups, associations, consultants and corporations were in scope. Preference was given to entities/people who are not part of a Government of Ontario’s public accessibility related council/ committee.

Carleton University

The Canadian Disability Policy Alliance

People for Education

Easter Seals Ontario

The Learning Disabilities Association of Ontario

Inclusive Education Canada

Peter Chaban

Heather Willis

Dr. Gary Bunch

Community Living Ontario

Cheryl M. Jorgensen, Ph.D

The Inclusive Design Research Centre, OCAD University

Transitions and Inclusive Environments Lab (TRAIL)


8Leading Practices


This report further identified leading practices from the other jurisdictions for further investigation. These practices were grouped into four main themes.
The first leading practice identified is inclusive strategies for education, which is emerging as a main initiative for policymakers. These inclusive strategies go beyond incorporating students into mainstream classes. The focus is on ensuring students with disabilities have an inclusive experience in the school community as a whole. Newfoundland, New Zealand, and Australia have all implemented strategies to improve inclusiveness in schooling to achieve a well-rounded, high quality education.
The second leading practice identified is adding greater flexibility on graduation dates for students with disabilities, recognizing different lengths of school may be necessary for individualized education. In Singapore, to raise the quality of education for students with special needs, the Ministry of Education announced in March 2007 the extension of special education graduation age to 21 years for children taking mainstream secondary curriculum or pursuing vocational education programs.
The third leading practice is new legislation in New York that targets discrimination and bullying from other students. The law prohibits harassment by employees or students on school property or at school functions, as well as discrimination against a student based on his/her actual or perceived race, color, weight, national origin, ethnic group, religion, religious practice, disability sexual orientation, gender or sex by school employees or students. As the long-term detrimental impacts of bullying have gained increasing attention over the last several year, New York State is leading other jurisdictions in implementing anti-bullying legislation.
Finally, the fourth leading practice identified is on improved data collection. The Australian government believes a nationally consistent approach to collecting data on students with disability will give governments, schools and education authorities’ information about how many students with disability are enrolled in Australian schools, where they are located and the level of adjustments provided for them to participate in schooling on the same basis as other students.

9Conclusion


This Final Report identified regulations, policies and programs across Canadian and international jurisdictions to help make education more accessible to people with disabilities. It was evident that the jurisdictions examined inclusivity and giving students the resources to obtain high-quality educations are primary goals across jurisdictions. Overall, Ontario appears to be comparable or better than most other jurisdictions examined in helping to make education more accessible to persons with disabilities.

Select jurisdictions had unique policies and/or strategies in place that Ontario may wish to consider. A number of programs and services geared toward improving the outcomes of accessibility goals were found to be especially noteworthy and relevant to the Ontario context. Jurisdictions like New Zealand are leading the way to achieving greater accessibility and inclusiveness in schools, tacking some of the barriers that were found across jurisdictions. In general, it appeared that gaps often remain between policies and what actually happens in practice.





Download 1.92 Mb.

Share with your friends:
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   35




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page