top of page
  • jejns58

The Trust is Irrevocably Broken...

Updated: Nov 15, 2022

Lies My (daughter's) Teachers Told Me

 

In my witness statement, several of the points I list relate to actions made by teachers and psychologists during Victoria's Grade 10 year. I was unaware of what was happening behind the scenes until we received the school board's Arguably Relevant Documents in May 2019.


In October 2015, we were negotiating a settlement for a Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario complaint we filed in June 2015. This was because her former high school failed to fully and accurately implement Victoria's Individual Education Plan while she was in Grade 9. One of the things we requested was a WIAT-III Academic Achievement Test to be administered to her. We were concerned about her grades as they did not correspond with her measured cognitive abilities.


On October 14, 2015, only six of the 14-16 applicable subtests were done. I immediately questioned why a partial WIAT-III was done. I have yet to receive a satisfactory reply. A couple of weeks later, I requested a copy of the Clinician's Report, including the detailed age and grade levels of the subtests administered. This would allow us to compare her progress to several prior assessments. In meetings held at the high school, we were given several excuses as to why they would not or could not give us this information. This included the implication that we were not qualified or intelligent enough to understand the results


By December, we realized this was futile, so in early 2016 we made an appointment for a full PsychoEducational Assessment to be done by a private psychologist. We were devastated when we received the results on April 22, 2016. Victoria's cognitive ability scores had dropped significantly from an assessment done in 2010. We were worried sick that she had an illness or a medical condition causing this, but we found out the lack of appropriate reading instruction was the cause.


This is called The Matthew Effect. When students cannot read at grade/age level, they do not have the background knowledge and vocabulary to be able to demonstrate their cognitive abilities accurately.


At this point, we realized we had to find an appropriate option to ensure that Victoria would receive the evidence-based reading, writing, and math remediations, accommodations, and interventions she required. We researched the options and made the decision to have her apply to The Gow School. It is a private boarding school in South Wales, New York, about 20 minutes drive from Buffalo. On May 13, 2016, she was accepted for her Grade 11 year beginning in September 2016.


We asked for a meeting with the school to provide the school with the recent PsychoEducational, GORT-4, and CTOPP assessments. During this meeting on June 7, 2016, we were finally given a copy of the WIAT-III test done 7 1/2 months prior on October 14, 2015. I did not open the envelope until Victoria, and I arrived home. I was absolutely shocked to read that Victoria—who was about to finish Grade 10—had been assessed as having Reading Comprehension at a Grade 5.2 level and Pseudoword Decoding at a Grade 7.6 level.


We sent an email to the school to ask what remediations and accommodations would be put in place for Victoria for grade 11 to help her reach the grade-level reading, math, and writing abilities she was capable of. They refused to make any changes to her IEP and stated, "Within the high school setting, Victoria's Individual Education Plan continues to provide the necessary supports and accommodations to meet her learning needs." The school board was expecting us to accept that failing Grade 10 Math and very low grades in English and other courses were acceptable for Victoria.


This was when we made the final decision to enroll Victoria in The Gow School for Grade 11.


Fast forward to May 2016. I received the Arguably Relevant Documents from the Lawyer for the school board. While reading through all 500-plus pages, I see copies of emails between school staff, board administration staff, and two board psychologists.


On October 28-29, 2015, the learning support teacher, the vice-principal, and a superintendent of the board, made a plan to conceal the Clinician Report results from us. At this point, I had not yet requested this document. Why would they make a plan not to give us this document with important information regarding her Reading Comprehension abilities? They knew we were concerned, yet let us continue to think everything was ok.


A second email on November 6, 2015, between two school board psychologists, now retired, discussed coming up with a "script" for the vice-principal of the high school to give us excuses why they would not provide us the Clinician Report and that they did not need any additional information to implement Victoria's IEP.


So now there are 5 staff members of the school board coming up with lies and excuses why we should not know about Victoria's reading skills. Meanwhile, Victoria's struggles in grade 10 were increasing, her grades were dropping, and she was suffering emotionally.


The third email on November 25, 2015, was between the superintendent from the first email and one of the psychologists from the second email. They were discussing changing how the Clinician Report scores are calculated to make it appear to us that the results of the 2011 and 2015 WIAT-III tests are basically the same, and Victoria's academic achievement was the best that she could do.


Advocating for your child with learning disabilities is difficult enough, but what do you do when the people trusted with educating your child act in such a manner? During the time we were negotiating the first HRTO settlement, 5 people working for her former school board knew our daughter, who was in grade 10, could only comprehend her schoolwork, textbooks, and material at the level of a student in grade 5. We settled the complaint on December 5, 2015, unaware of this vital information.


I don't know what we would have done if we had been informed of this information when we were negotiating to settle the first complaint. Hindsight tells me there would have been no settlement, and it would have gone to a hearing. The school board refused to provide what Victoria needed in June 2016, so I expect they would have refused the same in November/December 2015.


There are a lot of what if's that still go through my head. What if we were not persistent in trying to find an answer for why Victoria was struggling? What if we had accepted that the staff members involved were the experts in educating Victoria, and had her best interests in mind? What if we did not have the means at the time to scrape together the money to have Victoria attend The Gow School?


Parents expect that the schools and teachers are the experts in educating our children. We read the school board's websites and find statements like "We build each student's tomorrow, every day" and special education plans stating, “Programs shall be designed to assist exceptional students with special needs to develop their maximum potential”.


How many other students and families in that school board were or are being told the same or similar things as we were? I don't believe that were are the only family that has been deceived by the staff of this school board. The extent that these professional educators would go still makes me furious. How many students' futures have been compromised by people who would go to such lengths to conceal vital information from parents? I will never know, and that is a heartbreaking feeling to deal with.








64 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

The Power of Experience - Parents Supporting Parents

“There is no more powerful advocate than a parent armed with information and options.” Rod Paige - 7th United States Secretary of Education The November 23, 2022, edition of The Chronicle Herald in No

Settled But Unsettled

“The Parties will be permitted to advise that the matter has been resolved to the satisfaction of all Parties.” Victoria’s Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario’s complaint against her former school board

bottom of page