Teasing Out the Tension: Policy Reform, Research-Based Practice, and Parental Choice in Public Education

• In Event: Critical Perspectives on Education Policy and Schools, Families, and Communities: Possibilities for the Public Good

Abstract

Like many school boards in Ontario, the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) has a long history of offering half or full-time self-contained special education classes (Author, 2010; TDSB, 2016). The practice of organizing students along lines of ability continues across the province despite the Ontario Ministry of Education’s position that inclusive programming should be the first choice for student placement. Decades of research show that traditional special education practices can further disadvantage students, particularly racialized youth and youth living in poverty (De Valenzuela et al., 2006 ; Skiba, et al, 2006; Author, 2010; 2019), and demonstrates that inclusive education best supports students identified as having a special education need or disability (Mitchell, 2010; 2015). While the TDSB has made attempts to align its policies and practices with more recent research around inclusion, it has experienced significant pushback from parents and communities. The purpose of this paper is to explore the tension between research-based district policy reform and parents and communities who express their desire to maintain the status quo. Using TDSB policy texts and media articles as data and grounded in critical policy analysis and critical disability theory, the paper presents findings from a critical analysis of the TDSB’s recent effort to address issues tied to ability grouping.

In 2017, two committees charged with finding ways to improve equity recommended the TDSB reconsider its policy of educating students in self-contained classrooms and pursue more inclusive programming opportunities for students identified as disabled (TDSB, 2017). They did so based on their own and others’ research as well as the TDSB’s data on student outcomes. Parents’ response to this recommendation was swift and critical. Multiple media outlets were engaged as well as were various forms of parental and community mobilization. At the centre of the debate was parental choice. The TDSB is clear in its aim to respect parent choice regarding student placement and programming (TDSB, 2018). However, this situation raised an interesting and important question: if research demonstrates the social, academic, and economic disadvantages of self-contained special education programs, should boards continue to make them available if that is what parents want?

Perhaps recognizing parent choice as a key driver in maintaining self-contained programming for students with disabilities, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) wrote a statement to address, “Inclusive education is to be understood as a fundamental human right of all learners. Notably, education is the right of the individual learner, and not, in the case of children, the right of a parent or caregiver. Parental responsibilities in this regard are subordinate to the rights the child…” (CRPD, 2016, p. 3). This paper maps the struggle one public board of education encounters as it attempts to undergo research-based policy reform while continuing to honor parental choice over student programming. Additionally, this paper identifies the unique position of public institutions caught between addressing the wishes and investments of their parent communities and upholding the principles of justice as identified through the United Nations.

Author

• Gillian Parekh, York University