Minutes – October 22/08
District ABA Advisory
2 Attending All candidates meeting for school trustees information on candidates’ positions will follow
Meeting called to order at 7:10pm
Began with introductions for new members
We have not had any updates from the district on our outstanding issues
§ Asked for notification for parents when they received aide matches – did not occur this summer we will follow up to see if this is possible
§ Wanted response about access to resource room for consultants
§ Request for 15 minutes extra time like SEA’s
§ A parent noted that they received bell to bell coverage and 15 minutes prep time
§ Also 15 hours familiarization is more flexible and seemingly can be paid for each year different from the past practice of only once per Aide per child
§ Some parents have meetings covered at home as well as parents have meetings covered at school
§ It seems that there may be extensions available for the 15 hours – parents for whom this is necessary need to apply to Student Support Services
Questions about break time
§ For some students there is a need for break coverage by fully trained ABA SW’s and this is difficult to accommodate
§ Some schools have been working with parents to accommodate children with those needs
Team Meeting Attendance
§ We need to review this with Anne Turner
§ Principals seem to ask many questions – and not be aware that they can make the decision about covering this time.
§ We need to review letter of understanding that was sent out a year and a half ago – with Anne Turner and Rick as some of those things seem no longer relevant
Nancy Walton motioned
§ That we follow up with district on the request for them to consider how to compensate our consultants
§ Parents were in agreement with this idea – we need the district to keep moving through their minds to see how children’s needs could best be met. Discussion about district paying for consultants
§ One parent noted that her preference would be for her to keep the relationship with Consultant and not have a consultant who was a district employee – It is recognized that having them as part of the district likely means they would be part of a union which feels risky for parents – further parents noted their need to maintain control of their children’s programs to ensure they continue to move at a reasonable pace and work with the child’s home program.
Note from discussion – If you go to Surrey Connect
§ They will not pay for BI’s to do full school days
Nancy W discussed her thoughts on a Hub school (an ABA school within a school) with 20 kids where ABA SW’s could be trained. It would give parents that do not run home ABA programs an opportunity to access ABA in the school. That school could also have an after school program for those kids. Her vision is that that organization could provide additional ABA SW’s to the local schools, through the numerous training hours that would be available. This would be like an ABA BASES program for those children as another option.
ABA in the schools
Seminar coming for Teachers – who need a basic ABA education
There is still perception from SEA’s who come from Sub lists that ABA parents are difficult and children will need to receive aversives, some debunking of myths may be necessary.
Parents are wondering if Integration teachers could be excused in the cases where they are working against the collaborative team (ie the ABA Consultant and the parents). Principals could oversee the IEP’s of students who were not covered by IT’s.
Look to see if there is an ABA SW union rep. Deb Antifeav will try to find this out.
Need to review with district about 15 minutes of prep time. Is it a union issue?
It has been stated that there is no rule that PD days could not be one to one time for ABA SW’s to work with children. This seems to be at the principal’s discretion.
Are there any ABA SW’s on the spare board – there is one mother who’s child was not given one as the posting does not seem to have happened. – this question will be posed to the District by the Advisory at our next meeting.
Nancy Walton noted that she would not be able to continue in her position after January and asked that others consider if they are interested in running for her position at the next general meeting in January.