All Students Achieving Potential Kevin Lamoureux, Robert Dixon, Gareth Neufeld, and Teresa Chernecki If you want to stir up a little action, simply bring up the topic of inclusion around a group of educators. The argument goes like this: On one side you find those who regard inclusion as the end of the socially barbaric practice of isolating atypical students who might otherwise be enriched by the opportunity to interact with their age-peers as equals. At the other end, across the divide, are others who bewail a one-size-fits all approach to education; those who feel that inclusion is an unrealistic burden imposed upon classroom teachers by those who are not working in the trenches. One perspective holds fast to the idea that the best place for all students is in the regular classroom, desegregated from their peers, or from equal learning opportunities. The other extreme, while perhaps no less concerned with the social development of special needs/segregated students, equally committed to equality of learning, sees the reality of inclusion as far less holistic. Often times, these are teachers who have found themselves trying to accommodate wide varieties of learners in their classroom, feeling under-supported and inadequately trained (Bina, 1999; Carrington, & Saggers, 2008; Dymond, Renzaglia, & Chun, 2008, Frederikson, Simmonds, Evans, & Soulsby, 2007; Humphrey, 2008; Miller, 2008; Treffinger, Sortore, & McCluskey, 1995). It is, of course, prudent for us to point out early (for the benefit of readers not familiar with our provincial education system) that in Manitoba the inclusion debate has seemingly already been settled. Certainly Bill 13, the legislation mandating Appropriate Education Programming, has brought a full stop to the conversation in terms of policy (Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth, 2005). Much to the satisfaction, relief, and applause of many education professionals, our public policy now more closely reflects our province’s social value of inclusiveness for all citizens (Friendly & Lero, 2002). With that debate supposedly settled, what remains is the challenge of providing appropriate educational programming, given certain realities of classrooms and schools today. Opinions vary. We are eager to assert that this article does not wish engage in any controversy. We do not wish to propel the inclusion argument any further, nor do we wish to impede its’ progress. The All Students Achieving at Potential (A.S.A.P.) program, which is the exclusive focus of this piece, is offered as a possibility, a programming alternative that may help schools who are struggling to adapt themselves to a mandated policy that may otherwise present as overwhelming (cf. http://dxndix. googlepages.com/home). Having expressed our qualifier of neutrality we might now contradict ourselves by hazarding the following editorial. The debate of inclusion should probably be confined to issues of practice, rather than policy. As written, Bill 13 and the principle of inclusion are both eloquent and socially responsible. The policy reflects those principles that contemporary educators will value most highly, namely those of equity, acceptance, tolerance, and community. Under ideal circumstances, in a school without want for funding, highly trained staff, community support, or physical space, such a model school would boast full inclusion practices as a shining beacon for all other schools to follow.

Of course those schools with less resources, in a less than ideal reality, are forced to consider certain compromises, or concessions in their programming (for more discussion on the topic of inclusion, please see Appendix A). In Manitoba we have seen the birth of a long overdue approach to education, implemented with varying degrees of success. It is within this variance of implementation, within the many experiences of educators growing through the infancy of legislated inclusive programming, that this heated debate exists. It is for those people, on either side of the divide, that we offer the A.S.A.P. program; one example of how an enthusiastic and talented team of inclusionists have responded to the challenges of appropriate programming. Provincial Mandate The provincial school system is built around school divisions, geographic catchments within the province, who are ultimately accountable to a central authority. Legislation created by Manitoba Education, Citizenship, and Youth becomes the rule for each school division, although each division (comprised of its trustees, Superintendents, consultants, Principals, and various administrators) bring these policies to life. It is at the divisional level that one might find customs and practices unique to their own locale, hopefully representative of the values and needs of the communities they serve. Bill 13 (Appropriate Education Programming), heralds the coming of a new paradigm for education in Manitoba. If one were to wear the wording of this new legislation like a pair of glasses and look towards the future, one might see classrooms rich with every manner of diversity; be it cultural, developmental, learning style, or learning ability. Teachers in these classrooms would be fully supported by a network of well-trained colleagues able to support the range of challenges presented by students. Children would be groomed into a climate that was both socially fulfilling and intellectually stimulating (with cognitive challenges authentically matched to their current developmental level). In short, an ideal classroom would be fully inclusive, responsibly supported, challenging and rewarding. Of course, change does not take place in a vacuum. The vision of inclusion, even with the enlightened wording of Bill 13, is perhaps limited by our current realities within Manitoba education. Those schools making the move towards full inclusion within their walls are courageously attempting to build a new model of service delivery around older models that are already well entrenched (Bruno-Jofre, 1993; Bruno-Jofre & Mitchell, 1998; Gregor & Wilson, 1984). The primary support for special-needs students has been provided by paraprofessional workers; the teaching or educational assistants (EAs) in schools. These positions were first introduced to Manitoba schools in the 1980s when high needs students were first integrated into regular school activities. The motivation behind this model of support was that teachers, being trained primarily in the education and cognitive development of students, could not be expected to also tend to the toileting, feeding, or

other physiological needs of disabled children. EAs were brought into classrooms to help with the non-professional care of children who would not otherwise have an opportunity to be a part of the larger school community. They were not expected to handle any teaching, differentiation of instruction, or behavioral issues (The Manitoba Teachers’ Society, 2004, 2008). The roles and duties of EAs have evolved over time, although they still represent the most likely source of adult support for teachers in their classrooms. While some school divisions have independently decided to hire only those EAs who have had some formal training, there is no legislation stating that they must be (The Manitoba Teachers’ Society, 2008). As much as the province has taken an interest in the content of courses offered in these training programs, there is no expectation that prospective EAs must participate. The consequence for schools working towards inclusion is that classroom teachers will oftentimes find themselves being the only adult in their room trained to respond to the various challenges posed by a broadening range of special needs. Talking to teachers working in inclusive classrooms today, it becomes rapidly apparent that the type of support needed has changed (Dymond, Renzaglia, & Chun, 2008; The Manitoba Teachers Society, 2008). Special-needs students integrated into mainstream classrooms need more than toileting and mobility support to enjoy the same scholastic success as their peers. For these students to be appropriately challenged, for them to be given the opportunity to engage with developmentally appropriate curriculum, teachers must be able to prepare individual lessons for many of their students, or be supported by assistants capable of differentiating lessons for those who need. EA support is governed by a model of categorical funding which outlines how much support will be given to students exhibiting specific behaviors or challenges. This range of special-needs are categorized hierarchically according to severity (Level 1 being the least severe category, up to Level 3 for those with the most urgent of needs likely to be encountered), with each category representing possible EA time with that child. In short, a Level 3 student will be matched with an EA on a full time basis, a Level 2 student will work with an EA on a part time basis, and administrators will have a smaller amount of money with which to strategize support for their school’s Level 1 students. Returning to our discussion of the challenges facing teachers in inclusive classrooms, we must remember that these well-meaning, often highly talented and enthusiastic EAs are often not trained to meet the needs of categorically funded students. Furthermore, they are certainly not mandated to help match the curriculum, daily lesson plans, or inquiry studies to the learning needs of their students. Schools have been challenged to fill a lot of roles in the lives of young people over the years. School administrators and decision makers must serve many masters. We know that more and more schools are providing lunch programs, hygiene programs, social work and counseling services, mediation, family programming, cultural awareness programming, and life-skills training. Yet, at root, schools remain a place of learning. Given our understanding of the current climate of education, our vision for the future, and

our many challenges, the question becomes: “how might schools best provide for the learning needs of all their students, in an inclusive setting?” Behavior is Only a Symptom of the Problem Ecolé Munroe Junior High (serving grades 7 through 9) has traditionally been forced to respond to many of the challenges characteristic of an inner-city Winnipeg school. A significant percentage of the school’s population are students who could be identified as being at-risk, or of low socio-economic status. If ever there was a school that could find itself overcome with the task of trying to support the “social emotional development of students, resourcing for families or [providing] individual counseling” (Dixon, 2007d), it would be Munroe. Behavioral issues and student safety had become critical concerns in the years prior to the creation of A.S.A.P. Many of Munroe’s students had become involved with gang activity, drug usage, and other forms of criminal enterprise. A report published by the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy (2004) described categories of socio-economic status, based upon indicators such as employment (or lack thereof), education level, academic performance on standardized tests, and family composition. Based upon these categories, Munroe’s student demographics represented a community that was “most disadvantaged,” struggling with high unemployment, broken families, and an estimated 37% high school graduation rate (Manitoba Centre for Health Policy, 2004). While the neighborhood surrounding this middle-years school may not have changed since 2005, when A.S.A.P. was first created, the service that Munroe offers certainly has. Staff at Munroe report that as these programming changes have evolved, some students have begun to play two roles in their lives: One that remains street-tough and mistrustful when away from school, and a second one that is excited about learning, and the success they have achieved. One student in particular stands out for the teaching team at Munroe. Ian is described by his teachers as being a child that started at Munroe well behind his peers in both academic, and social development. Ian’s confidence in the classroom was almost non-existent. Being both shy, and challenged with a speech impediment, he was not known to have ever raised his hand in class, volunteer an answer, or initiate conversation with a fellow student. In terms of learning outcomes, and core competencies, Ian had been moved forward without any of the foundational skills necessary for later success. His case typifies the kind of challenges teachers now often face in middle years schools. Visiting Ecolé Munro Junior High today is like stepping into another world. For those who work with, in, or about schools; especially those familiar with the student demographics of inner-city schools, Munroe’s classrooms first appear almost eerily quiet and efficient. Walking into a grade 8 language arts class reveals much of what is at the heart of the A.S.A.P. program. Physically, the classroom is set up to allow the teacher to work directly with a smaller cohort, differentiated according to assessed developmental level. Those students not currently working with the teacher are arranged around this small group in semi-circular formation; working quietly. Having been given their

assignments during their own work session with their teacher, and having received their assignment based upon their actual academic needs, they are engaged and committed to their work. There are always many adults in Munroe School, a team who work directly with students on academics in the classroom. This team is comprised of teachers, teacher partners, teacher interns, a social worker, and a resource teacher. The teaching team is enthusiastic about student learning, delivering a compacted curriculum that is outcome based, yet flexible enough to be matched to the needs of individual students. Academic success; which leads to a growing sense of mastery for students who would otherwise be detached from their classroom lessons, is seen as the best strategy for combating the causes of behavioral problems. Academic success is King at Munroe Junior High. The resource room’s walls are lined with chart paper mapping out the compacted curriculum, a formidable task completed mostly by teacher interns (described momentarily). The students in this room are being scaffolded (Vygotsky, 1978) (through a process referred to as cognitively restructuring) into the ASAP model by members of the same highly engaged, and motivated teaching team. In this stage of their integration, students are mentored into an academic life where success and confidence are the norm. This success becomes the hoped-for transition into future successes, and before long these students are mainstreamed into regular classrooms where there is no less opportunity for cognitive engagement. The ASAP model is constructed from the following components, all of which are described below: • • • • •

Differentiated Instruction Co-teaching Curriculum Compacting Shared Sight-Based Management Cognitive restructuring, or the development of academic efficacy

The Dixon Differentiated Instruction Model In an Australian study Gross (2004, 2006) found that in typical early/middle years classrooms, between the 11th and 89th percentile of academic performance, there could be a five year range of ability. That means that within a single year grouping, not including the top or bottom ten percent, there could be have a decade of developmental range. Here developmental age, or the actual academic level an individual student is performing at, is distinguished from chronological age, which typically determines a student’s placement in the lockstep hierarchy of school grades. At Munroe, Dixon (2007c) found a four to five year range in academic performance, based upon standardized tests such as the Comprehensive Mathematical Abilities Test (CMAT), the Test of Reading Comprehension (ToRC), and the ClearSpeak Adult Pronunciation Test (CAP Test). Most educators will not be surprised by theses findings, recognizing the same learning challenges in their own classrooms.

The A.S.A.P. program utilizes a model of ability grouping for students based upon assessment of subject specific curriculum outcomes. The grade 8 language arts class briefly introduced above might have three or four clusters, or groups depending on the composition of the class. Each of the first three groups (Group One, Two, and Three) will work within a one-and-a-half year block of curriculum outcomes. In this way the classroom teacher is able to lesson plan for those students currently performing at grade level, or just above (Group 1), and across the full range of student academic performance (for Groups Two and Three). The fourth group is clustered for gifted programming where appropriate. The assessment of students for these groups can be described as dynamic (cf. Matthews & Foster, 2005, 2006). Essentially, student performance is evaluated continually and measured against a pre-established continuum of operationalized learning outcomes. In this way, students are not prevented from moving forward through the outcomes at their own pace, the only requirement for advancement being a demonstration of curriculum mastery (80% success, 80% of the time) and detailed remediation. Of course differentiated instruction is not a new practice (Hall, 2002; Morgan, 1996; Renzulli, 1994; Renzulli & Reis, 1985; Tomlinson, 1999). However, what Munroe School has done improves upon earlier theories in two ways. The first improvement is to increase teacher training and support, putting more adults into classrooms able to facilitate differentiated instruction. The second strength of this model is found in Munroe’s efforts to develop an approach to curriculum that facilitates more effective and efficient lesson planning and delivery (as will be expanded upon in Curriculum Compacting). Recognizing that such a dramatic change in classroom management might represent a significant move away from some teachers comfort zone; the A.S.A.P. program will mentor practicing teachers into progressively more advanced usage of the Differentiated Model. As teachers move through these levels of implementation (Levels One through Three) they will ideally develop a greater measure of confidence and efficacy working with the Differentiated approach. This is accomplished through mentoring, demonstration, and continual professional development, all fundamental commitments for the A.S.A.P. team. Co-teaching Co-teaching has been discussed extensively in education literature (Mitchell, 2007). In addition to the obvious advantages of shared resources, talent, and workload, it has also been noted that co-teachers enjoy “feelings of worth, renewal, partnership and creativity” (Gately & Gately, 2001 as cited in Mitchell, 2007). In the A.S.A.P. program co-teaching is used to mentor teachers into the higher levels of differentiated instruction (described above), to help prepare students for full classroom integration (cognitive restructuring, described below), and to ensure the continued support of children working in mainstream classrooms.

Perhaps the most encouraging aspect of Munroe’s A.S.A.P. program for educators is the system’s inherent concern for teacher support and professional development. A.S.A.P.’s creator and primary overseer, Robert Dixon, has continually expressed respect for a teacher’s need to see the validity and utility of any new program, rather than simply being told that it works. Veterans of the school system know that all too often teachers will receive the sales pitch for the latest education trends, theories, and buzz words; knowing these vogue new ideas will be bandied about and adopted by policy makers before such new practices have a chance to evolve natively in the classrooms they are being imposed upon. Munroe School has chosen instead to let the results of the A.S.A.P. program speak for themselves, while remaining genuinely committed to teachers willing to jump on board. In some cases teachers at Munroe who had become frustrated and disillusioned with their job were able to reconnect with their passion for teaching. In demonstrating the courage necessary to “let go” of familiar teaching methods and lessons plans, they were able to reconstruct their classrooms within the A.S.A.P. mold, with encouraging results. Gary Davidson, one Munroe teacher who was around before the creation of A.S.A.P., describes the model as “a win-win for everyone involved.” He sees the program’s success as a good publicity for the school, an improvement on workload and job-satisfaction for teachers, and a huge social/academic reward for students. As a teacher for 34 years in the public school system, Mr. Davidson’s accolades speak volumes. A.S.A.P.’s early trials began in his classroom, where both he and a Teacher Intern were scaffolded into higher levels of program implementation Program developers will find excellent research on the rationale and implementation in the work of Mitchell (2007). At Munroe co-teaching begins through demonstrations of differentiated instruction. The Resource Teacher, along with those teachers more familiar with the A.S.A.P. model work in partnership as co-teachers in classrooms working towards Level Three differentiation. This approach has allowed Munroe to expand the A.S.A.P. model throughout the school. Building trust in those teachers originally reluctant to change, and then including them through mentoring and professional development. Shared Sight-Based Management Along with the Resource Teacher who servers as coordinator and strategist, the A.S.A.P. program’s teaching team is completed by teaching interns, teaching partners, a social worker, and EAs. The aggregate of all this talent is a school well supported by a highly trained and skilled staff. This wealth of staffing is made possible through what equates to an administrative shift in paradigm. Dixon (2007d) has equated this operational revolution to the theories of site-based management, familiar to educators since the 1990’s (Cotton, 1992).

Site-based management is the decentralization of management decisions, allowing for choices to be made by those who are most directly affected (Dixon, 2007d). While there have been some concerns about the effectiveness of site-based management (David & Peterson, 1984; Lawton, 1996), too often those working in site-based models have been limited by lack of expertise or resources, or have failed to focus their efforts on those “spheres that affect student learning the most” (Dixon, 2007d). The advantage of site-based management is that it allows a school to operate independently of certain centralized policies; building programs that are responsive to the unique needs of their own unique community. When the zeitgeist surrounding a school calls for fundamental change, as was the case at Munroe prior to the introduction of A.S.A.P., it can allow for “an on-going process to encourage growth in a school’s programs and curriculum and to promote and improve student achievement” (Dixon, 2007d). In adopting a Shared Site Based Management model, Dixon, Principal Neufeld and the rest of the A.S.A.P. team were able to reallocate student support dollars (typically used to hire paraprofessional workers according to categorical funding), into services that were more responsive to Munroe’s individual needs1. In order to implement a truly differentiated model of learning, capable of serving all of the school community’s diverse student body, most of these funds are used to ensure appropriate support for differentiated instruction. One criticism of many new programs, inherent to the start-up costs involved, is a lack of sustainability. Many good ideas are at-risk of disappearing year-to-year as funding structures change, and evolve. One unique aspect of the A.S.A.P. model is that its implementation does not require any funding that isn’t already guaranteed. A Shared Site Based Management approach allows for a reallocation of funds, reflecting the needs of the school community, but not the commitment of more funds then the school would already be entitled to. There is no criticism, based upon cost-issues that A.S.A.P. can not defend against. This program simply does not cost the school division any more money than it is already committed to spending, based upon the learning needs of a school community. Teacher Interns form the backbone of the A.S.A.P. service delivery model. In partnership with the University of Winnipeg, Teacher Interns are chosen from cohorts of student teachers completing their practicum requirements at Munroe. Students invited to participate in A.S.A.P. are those who are clearly enthusiastic and passionate about teaching. From the 1200 or so students in The University of Winnipeg’s Faculty of Education, Munroe is looking for those students who stand out as having exceptional 1

The Special-Needs Categorical Funding allocated to schools has traditionally been based on the cost of providing paraprofessional support for identified special needs students. In the River East/ Transcona School Division this model has evolved into a system of Student Service Units, equivalent to the amount normally spent for paraprofessional support, which may be used at the discretion of local administrators wishing to restructure their student support model of service delivery. It is this tremendous flexibility on the part of the school division which has allowed the A.S.A.P. program to be as successful as it has been.

confidence and subject mastery in front of a classroom. Since A.S.A.P. is a model of outcome-based curriculum mastery the Teacher Interns should ultimately be sophisticated thinkers capable of animating the curriculum, operationalizing learning outcomes, and bringing it to life in a way that facilitates cognitive engagement. Munroe’s Teacher Interns (three of whom deserve special mention: Chrissie Baker, Bryce Rydgen, and Ronalee Nickel) have contributed to A.S.A.P.’s success through curriculum compacting (discussed below), lesson planning, co-teaching, mentoring, and other high quality services necessary for true differentiation. These student Teacher Interns are hired to work at Munroe in addition to their required practicum hours, continuing through to completion of their studies. This means that they are able to earn money while gaining anywhere from three to four thousand hours of school experience before graduation. For A.S.A.P., it means that the students of Munroe benefit from a better student/teacher ratio, and their classrooms are supported by a greater number of trained professionals; more specifically, up-and-coming professionals handpicked for their teaching effectiveness and commitment to inclusive, differentiated ideals. Some will criticize the employment of Teacher Interns who are not yet fully qualified as classroom teachers. It might even be argued that while these student teachers may have more formal training than others who are responsible for supporting categorically funded students, that they still lack the hands-on experience that only time in the trenches can provide. Both of these arguments are only half-truths, however. The Teacher Interns employed at Munroe are hand-picked for certain qualities necessary for a co-teaching, differentiated model. These students come with University training, and continue to study, while simultaneously gaining more practical training that is more than any other student graduating from a teacher training program in Manitoba. While there is certainly no substitute for practical experience, one must also be careful not to dismiss the necessity of theoretical training as well. If this were not so, there would simply be no need to train teachers in a University setting. Obviously this is would be unacceptable. Along with the Teacher Interns, A.S.A.P. employs teaching partners: Certified teachers who work alongside full time staff as needed. Student Service Unit monies also make it possible to employ a full-time Social Worker to work with students and their families, when necessary. Of course, Munroe continues to depend upon EAs for those students who require full time assistance to participate in an inclusive school. Under this model paraprofessional staff act in a more traditional role, assisting teachers with nonprofessional duties such as toileting and feeding. The teaching staff at Munroe are therefore freed to invest heavily into lesson planning and curriculum development. Of course this kind of radical restructuring of student supports and school budget requires a great deal of trust on the part of administrators and teachers alike. Asking a veteran classroom teacher to let go of their usual EA supports in favor of teacher interns is only reasonable if the new model has been proven successful. The A.S.A.P. team has worked at all stages of implementation to demonstrate the strength of the Dixon Differentiated Model of instruction, ensuring that their programming changes could

defend against the most challenging of scrutiny. Munroe has benefited from a great deal of trust and confidence on the part of the River East/Transcona School Division. Curriculum Compacting To facilitate true differentiated instruction within the A.S.A.P. program, great efforts have been made to determine “which [curriculum] outcomes are introductory which are developing and which are foundational” (Dixon, 2007b), a process referred to as curriculum compacting. The result of this compacting is a continuum of learning outcomes, across the full range of middle-years curriculum. These are categorized as: • • •

Critical – those outcomes that terminate or form the foundation of future outcomes Important – learning outcomes that are necessary for future studies, but are reintroduced further along in the continuum Desirable – outcomes that provide exposure to certain topics, not essential for future learning

Once identified and categorized on the learning continuum, each learning outcome is operationalized, giving it a measurable value (Dixon, 2007b, 2007c). In this way students can be assessed and placed according to their actual developmental level, wherever that may fall across the continuum within a specific subject area. It also ensures that all learning, and therefore all instruction, is curriculum based, clearly defined, and easily assessed. Teachers in the A.S.A.P. program have reported that this structure also allows for easier multi-disciplinary lesson planning, and inquiry learning that is meaningful, relevant, and appropriately challenging. Student Groups (described above as Groups One through Three, with the possibility of a gifted group) are created so that students are working in class with peers within a one-and-a-half year developmental range as them, on the same curriculum. Teachers are able to plan for the learning of each group, with a clear understanding of the critical, important, and desirable learning outcomes, knowing that each student participating in the lesson are ready for the challenges presented to the group they are a part of. In this model student engagement is high because lessons are accurately matched to their actual level of comprehension. Student groups are small enough to allow as much student/ teacher interaction as is necessary for success, allowing students who might otherwise become frustrated and detached to succeed with pride and satisfaction. Curriculum Compacting under A.S.A.P. is further sophisticated by grouping categorized outcomes according to their purpose; be it reading, listening, speaking, viewing, etc. Again, the rationale behind this preparation is to ensure that classroom teachers are adequately supported in their labors to facilitate academic success for all of their students. Lesson planning for this model, while certainly more exacting, is also more rewarding. Teachers have clear expectations as to the amount of time, effort, and planning necessary to accomplish specific learning outcomes. Of course, these classroom teachers also benefit from the aide of Teacher Interns, teacher partners, as well as

resource teachers and EAs. This is appropriate education at its’ finest; academically based, grounded in teamwork, easily measurable. As teachers deliver their lesson plans to individual groups, their teaching partners or Teacher Interns remain present in the room to ensure that the other groups are supported in their work. Those not currently involved in a group lesson complete work given to them during their own work session with the teacher, which rotates evenly throughout the school cycle. Walk into any classroom at Munroe, at any time and you will students actively engaged; either directly with their teacher who is delivering a lesson tailored to their needs, or on individual assignments that are appropriately challenging, rewarding, and curriculum based. Figure One is an example of curriculum compacting from the Grade Seven Language Arts curriculum (Prepared by Chrissie Baker, former teacher intern): Figure 1. Examples of Critical, Important, and Desirable Outcomes 1.1.3 Experiment with Language and Form (6) Experiment with new forms of self expression. (desirable) 1.1.3 Experiment with Language and Form (7) Expand self-expression in oral, written, and visual forms. (important) 1.1.3 Experiment with Language and Form (8) Experiment with memorable language to convey personal perceptions, feelings, experiences, thoughts, and ideas in various forms. (critical)

Cognitive Restructuring For students to find their place within the A.S.A.P. model, for them to begin to celebrate the success of academic achievement, oftentimes it is necessary to undue a pattern of self defeating thought and action that has developed over years. Students who, because of social disadvantages or learning disabilities, or any other reason, have become frustrated with school learning often-times find themselves in a rut that is very hard to get out of. Disruptive or negative behavior borne of this frustration often reinforces itself by fulfilling an emotional need that might otherwise have been met through appropriate differentiation. Those who have visited Munroe before, and after the A.S.A.P. program’s deliberate efforts to deconstruct these behaviors have to believe in the value of academic engagement and success for these struggling youngsters2. 2

Those readers who are more comfortable with conceptions of cognition as a process, rather than a structure will note that the A.S.A.P. program’s use of the term Cognitive Restructuring is congruent with Information Processing Theories (cf. Miller, 1956, 1960). In this model, intellectual functioning (and resultant behaviour) is not a static, structure-centric phenomenon; but rather a continual flow of activity, creative in nature and contextually sensitive. This flow is governed by the experience and unique identity of the individual, often bound by artificially limiting constructs which can be reworked, or removed entirely, by new experiences and consistent success.

As students move through their school careers they formulate beliefs about themselves, their ability, and their identity within the school setting very quickly. If these beliefs are reinforced by academic failure, or social expectation, students can quickly become disengaged, increasingly at-risk, all the while believing themselves justified by previous failures and frustrations. For students who are of cultural minorities, or other marginalized populations, this cycle of self-deception, justification, and reinforcement can be even more entrenched in a young person’s psyche, reaching back into early life experiences, or social and home environments. For students in Group Three placements, or any student identified as being at-risk, the A.S.A.P. program begins for them in the school’s Resource Room. The goal of these early efforts is to replace expectations of academic failure with expectations of academic success, a cognitive restructuring of beliefs and perceptions. This is accomplished through assessment and highly structured lesson planning, facilitated by strong teacher/student ratios and interaction, for the purpose of “creating an environment where the intrinsic reward found in academic success can be nurtured” (Dixon, 2007a, 2007e). Students are given the opportunity to develop a sense of efficacy and mastery in their education, along with a sense of belonging to the school community. Chaffey has written about the value of such cognitive restructuring, or intervention (2003, 2006). His work with Australian Aboriginal children of low socioeconomic status has shown that many students will underachieve in school in order to remain “under the radar” in regards to their own academic ability. Like Aboriginal students here in Canada, who risk being labeled as apples3, or sellouts for achieving in school; Aboriginal students in Australia will maintain a misguided sense of loyalty to their home community by masking their cognitive prowess. However, these same students will often score very high on measures of intelligence if they are able to participate in appropriate intervention focusing on efficacy, belonging, respect, and trust. Preliminary studies in Canada have suggested that the same methodology might produce the same exciting results with our own students. Educators struggling to serve challenged populations will find these tools and strategies to be most encouraging. The A.S.A.P. program at Ecole Munroe Junior High is one of inclusion, true differentiated instruction, commitment to teacher support, schoolwide modeling of academic success and engagement, and responsible professional development; building successful classrooms in partnership through mentoring. Munroe enjoys a warm and supportive environment, driven by curriculum, with a community of students who might have otherwise been soon lost to the school system entirely.

3

A pejorative term used to denigrate Aboriginal people who have seemingly become enculturated into mainstream North American society. The statement being made as that such individuals may be “red” on the outside (visibly Aboriginal), but are “white” on the inside (reflecting European values), as an apple has red skin over white flesh.

Evaluating A.S.A.P. The staff at Munroe have been very interested in producing data that accurately reflects the impact that the A.S.A.P. model has had on the school community. First impressions seem to subjectively suggest very strong reasons to be excited by this program. As has been mentioned the population served by Munroe might easily be described as being at-risk; however, these same students are now enjoying academic success and a sense of belonging in their school community. Munroe’s classrooms are energetic, but focused; respectful and supportive; the schools hallways are clean, safe, and full of institutional pride. The feeling of being in such an achievement-oriented environment transcends quantifiable data. Young Ian, introduced earlier in this article, completed grades 7 through 9 in A.S.A.P. classrooms. Given his academic limitations there were many moments where his frustration with certain learning outcomes, and challenges, might have caused him to act out, or disengage from the classroom entirely. Because, of the very strong teacher/student ration made possible by within-class group and differentiation, Ian’s teachers were able to respond to the subtle cues that so often precede behavioural outbursts. He remained appropriately challenged, operating within his own zone of proximal development (Vygotsky, 1978), so that he could continually benefit from the intrinsic reward of academic success. All of Ian’s classroom efforts were grounded in curriculum outcomes so that his learning remained genuine, progressing up the continuum in preparation for high school. As Ian now prepares to enter into high school, his teachers recognize that he has become enculturated into a life of academic success. He has demonstrated mastery over all the core competencies required for high school success, and is much more comfortable learning independently. Socially, Ian’s progress has correlated with his academic success. He simply belongs with his peers in class. The A.S.A.P. teaching team has recognized that many children coming into their program come with years of experiential baggage that needs to be dropped by the wayside. Once this happens, through cognitive restructuring and continued success in a safe environment, being smart becomes cool for many children. Just as telling are teacher responses to the A.S.A.P. model, who are reporting a genuine satisfaction within their classrooms, and their careers. To be able to meet the mandate of Bill 13 with support and success has proven to be deeply rewarding experience. The rest of the data collected on the A.S.A.P. program has come from administrative records, and curriculum assessment results; compiled by Cristiana Paetkau (Teacher Intern). The method of analysis used to evaluate the ASAP program was a case study examining three years of administrative reports (recording incidents of suspension), collected for the school years; 2005-2006, 2006-2007, and 2007-2008. The data identifies the students’ grade level, gender, the number of days that each student was suspended from school, as well as the different types of incidents that led to the suspension. The

three years of data are kept as separate datasets for each of the school years represented in the study. For the evaluation process the students’ names were removed from the sample and replaced with an identification number in order to ensure the confidentiality each student. Munroe serves grades 7 through 9, the only grade levels used in the analysis of the data. Those students that do not fall into those categories are listed as missing values in the datasets. The analysis of this study was conducted solely on the totals of school suspensions. This leads to no references regarding the increase or decrease of total suspensions in comparison to the total population of the grades. The changes in total number of suspensions can only be compared to the numbers of suspensions from the sample over each of the three years. In all three years under examination it was observed that males were more likely than females to commit infractions. In 05/06 the ratio was approximately a 60/40 split in terms of males committing a greater number of infractions. This split became even more distinct over the three year period and as figure 1.1 shows, by the year 07/08 females were committing less than 20% of all the infractions. Gender Differences in Incident Frequency 100.00% 80.00% 60.00% Males 40.00%

Females

20.00% 0.00% 2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

Figure 1.1 illustrates the differences between the number of incidents involving males and those involving females

Within the data there are two different types of suspension cases, those cases where the student involved participated in only one type of infraction versus numerous types of infractions. The terms Behavioural Incident and Behavioural Event were used to distinguish between the two types of cases. Behavioural Incident: involves only one type of infraction. An example of this would be a student suspended for committing an act of bullying against a fellow student. In this case the infraction would be the act of bullying. Behavioural Event: can involve a student who receives a suspension after having committed more than one type of infraction at one time, essentially involving more than one Behavioural Incident. An example might be a student who threatened to injure a

fellow student with a weapon while fighting with them. In this case the infractions would be the threat of use of a weapon, as well as the act of fighting. When examining the total number of suspensions that occurred in a given school year, those cases concerning multiple infractions caused the total number of incidents to become inflated when taking all of the incidents into account. This is exemplified in the data from 05/06, where the total sum of infractions is 143, while the actual number of separate incidents is only 112. Most cases involved only one infraction; however, a minority of cases had up to five different types of infractions within the same incident. Although there are differences in the number of infractions that are involved in each case it is beyond the scope of this analysis to differentiate any further between those cases classified as Behavioural Events and those classified as Behavioural Incidents. As such, the remainder of this analysis shall focus on Behavioural Incidents, and all cases will be treated as if they stemmed from a single infraction. The student suspensions are classified into different types of infractions categorized from minor incidents of misconduct and disrespect, to move severe incidents such as physical assault and arson. From a discussion with Munroe staff, four different categories were established for the severity of incidents. The categories range from Severity Level 1, which includes the most severe types of infractions, to Severity Level 4 which includes the least severe infractions. Severity Level 1: Arson, Possession of Weapons, Threat with a Weapon, and Attack with a Weapon. Severity Level 2: Physical Abuse of a Staff Member or of a Student. Severity Level 3: Substance Abuse of either Drugs or Alcohol, and the Possession or Trafficking of Illegal Drugs. Severity Level 4: Fighting, Bullying, Theft, Disrespect, Misuse of Computers, Insubordination, Misconduct, Damage to Property, Verbal Abuse of a Staff or Student, Substance Abuse of Tobacco and any other infractions.

Total Incidents 120 100 80

2005-2006

60

2006-2007

40

2007-2008

20 0 Total Incidents

Figure 1.2 illustrates the number of total incidents that occurred over the three years

As shown in the figure above, there appears to be a decrease in the total number of events that have occurred over the three years examined. The total events were totaled at 112 in 05/06, while decreasing to 83 in 06/07 and finally decreasing even further to 57 in 07/08. This decrease resulted in an almost 50% reduction in the number of events from the first to the third year. Total Incidents by Severity Level 70 60 50 40

2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008

30 20 10 0 Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Figure 1.3 illustrates the breakdown of number of incidents by levels of severity for all three years under examination

At first glance, it would appear that while the total number of events decreased over the three years of study, the severity of those incidents increased overtime. In 05/06, Level 1 offences comprised 4.7% of the total number of incidents while in 07/08 they made up 13.5% of the total number of incidents. This apparent increase must be considered carefully.

There are two different perspectives by which to examine apparent changes in the type of incidents reported. The first relates to notions of general deterrence and specific deterrence (Sacco & Kennedy, 1998). A reduction in the number of total incidents reported could indicate that the program is working, suggesting that there may be some general deterrence felt by the students involved with ASAP to not be involved in a behavioural event. This general deterrence would deter all students in a general manner from committing acts against school policy. However, there is some evidence suggesting that there may be other issues regarding specific deterrence. Over the three years it was found that often the same students were committing many of the infractions. On a yearly basis, over 35% of all behavioural events were committed by students that had already committed a prior incident within the same year. Repeat Offenders 60 50 40 Total Offenders 30

Reoffenders

20

One Time Offenders

10 0 2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

Figure 1.4 Illustrates the breakdown of the number of offences committed by those students that reoffended within the year to the total number of offences for each year

Not only were there incidents of re-offending within a given year, there were also cases of re-offending by the same students over the course of several years. Three students re-offended all three years at Munroe, while 14 students re-offended in both their 8th and 9th grades. It is prudent to note however, that several students that re-offended in their first two years did not re-offend during their last year in the ASAP model. This data suggests that many of the severe incidents reported where perpetrated by individual students with ongoing behavioral concerns. Secondly, it is important to recognize that as the total number of incidents decreased through general deterrence, those students who did re-offend naturally represented a greater percentage of the incidents reported. This analysis examined the three years during which the ASAP program has existed. Our future goal is to examine at least two years prior to the start of the program to conclude if there are changes in the number and severity of incidents from prior to implementation. Another goal is to examine the differences between classes, those with ASAP and those without, to examine the differences in number of suspensions between what essentially will be an experimental group compared to a proper control group.

Discussion There is a danger in attempting to transplant a program from its original environment, to another setting that it is not native to (Dolowitz, & Marsh, 2000; Pal, 2005). Oftentimes the structure of an effective program is built in response to the many nuances of the context it serves in. Shared Site-Based Management requires that each individual community be allowed to evolve and grow to meet its’ own unique needs, removed from centralized authority or global policy. A.S.A.P. was created to meet the unique needs of the Munroe school community, to better serve the students and families that create its social tapestry. However, there are features of the A.S.A.P. model that represent tested and well-proven practices for teachers in an inclusive environment. Mitchell (2007) has produced an excellent literature review on the practice of coteaching. She found that researchers (Cook & Friend, 2004) recommend to policy makers that they be aware of the characteristics of the students to be served, the teachers involved, and the curriculum to be taught; before deciding that co-teaching strategies are appropriate. However, the literature also shows that when co-teaching is used in a thoughtful and responsible manner classrooms can enjoy stronger programming, greater cognitive engagement (Murawski, 2006), and greater social inclusion for students with special needs (Walther-Thomas, 1997 as cited in Mitchell, 2007). In the A.S.A.P. program co-teaching allows for differentiated groups to work fully supported in an inclusive classroom. Of course, the primary goal of such integrated classrooms, supported by a strong co-teaching model, is the academic success of all its’ students. As noted earlier the practice of curriculum compacting, in all of its variations, is not new to schools or researchers. While compacting has seen most of its research done in the area of gifted programming and enrichment, the philosophy of matching curriculum to the individual needs of pre-assessed students makes sense for all learners. Matthews & Foster (2005) write that in contemporary schools the best enrichment programs simply match the lessons taught to a student’s developmental level. They recognize that development in children and adolescents is not static, does not progress at a uniform rate, and requires the continued attention of dedicated schools to ensure continued engagement. This progressive and very sensible thinking is mirrored in the Dixon Differentiated Instruction Model which relies upon cooperative teaching, and curriculum compacting for its effectiveness. Further research is needed to determine the outcome for classrooms in replacing some of its EA support for Teacher Interns. The A.S.A.P. program draws much of its strength, and owes much of its success, to the quality of the Teacher Interns that have been involved. Obviously, any teacher candidates from the University of Winnipeg’s Faculty of Education have been prescreened and selected based upon established professional criteria. Most come to their practicum placements already armed with a high degree of professional training and awareness, and many with hours of hands-on experience working with children. As future classroom teachers themselves, these students are motivated, intelligent, energetic, and committed to the principles of appropriate education. EAs continue to play a vital support role in schools. As employed

paraprofessionals in the Manitoba school system policy makers must be careful to ensure that these committed and talented workers maintain their rightful place in the school community. Some theorists believe that North American children are entering into very uncertain times, where the global economy will demand much more from them in order to compete in a globalized marketplace (Friedman, 2005; VanTassel-Baska, 2007). It will become incumbent upon schools at all levels to ensure that their students are given every opportunity to succeed academically. This is an opportunity of the gravest necessity, but also of the most exciting possibilities. Under Bill 13 all students will have the opportunity to prepare for, and participate on this global playing field. While certainly we must expect some growing pains as schools respond to the challenges of providing inclusive, appropriate education for all students; we can now also turn our eyes to a remarkable future where all students are achieving at potential. Appendix A Based upon the works of Winzer (2007) and Treffinger and Feldhusen (1995), the following table lists some thoughts on the inclusion debate. The philosophy of inclusion is not questioned, but rather the ways in which inclusive policies might be used, or misused in schools today. Using inclusion…

Misusing inclusion…

Providing equitable education for all students, allowing each child to achieve their potential.

Treating all students the same, or providing the same services for all students. Equality does not mean ignoring individual differences. Demanding that individual teachers bear the full burden of differentiating instruction across the entire range of developmental needs in a classroom. Failing to provide appropriate support and training for classroom teachers. Assuming that simply housing diverse learners together will guarantee acceptance. Failing to acknowledge the questions that students will naturally have regarding their peers. Allowing mainstream students to be ignored while attentions are focused on higher-need students. Learning is focused on minimum standards of performance, rather than reaching individual potential. Academic pursuit is lost beneath mismanaged resources, inadequate support, and behavioural concerns. Inclusion is fashionable, but misunderstood. Inclusive classrooms are seen as a way trim budgets, rather than an opportunity to increase productivity, harness talent, and model success.

Working with teachers as a team. Providing professional development, resource support, and shared responsibility with a team of professionals dedicated to meeting the individual needs of each student in a mainstream classroom. Training teachers to act as mediators and guides to community building in an inclusive classroom. Working with students to build a greater understanding and acceptance of diversity, providing a sensitive and respectful learning environment for all learners. Inclusive classrooms remain a place of academic challenge and achievement. Each student is engaged with the curriculum at level appropriate for the developmental needs. Inclusion is more than policy, and more than a buzzword. It is a philosophy for action and a commitment to genuine support, growth, and community development.

References Bina, M. J. (1999). Schools for the visually disabled: Dinosaurs or mainstays? Educational Leadership, 56 (6), 78-81. Bruno-Jofre, R. D. C. (Ed.) (1993). Issues in the history of education in Manitoba: From the construction of the common school to the politics of voices. New York: Edwin/Mellen Press. Bruno-Jofre, R., & Mitchell, T. (1998). Education in Manitoba history. Manitoba History, 36, 2. Carrington, S., & Saggers, B. (2008). Service-learning informing the development of an inclusive ethical framework for beginning teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 24 (3), 795-806. Chaffey, G., & Bailey, S. (2003). The use of dynamic testing to reveal high academic potential and underachievement in a culturally different population. Gifted Education International, 18, 124-138. Chaffey, G., & Bailey, S. (2006). Coolebah dynamic assessment: Identifying high academic potential in at-risk populations. In B. Wallace & G. Eriksson, Diversity in gifted education: International perspectives on global issues. New York: Routledge Press. Cook, L., & Friend, M. (1995). Co-teaching: Guidelines for creating effective practices. Focus on Exceptional Children, 28 (3), 1-16. Retrieved May 28, 2008 from Ebscohost database. Cotton, K. (1992). School-based management. School Improvement Research Series. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, Portland, OR. Retrieved May 28, 2008 from http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/7/topsyn6.html David, J. L., & Peterson, B. M. (1984). Can schools improve themselves? A study of school-based improvement programs. Palo Alto, CA: Bay Area Research Group. Dixon, R. (2007a). Cognitive academic model. Winnipeg, MB: Ecolé Munroe Junior High School. Retrieved May 28, 2008 from http://dxndix.googlepages.com/home Dixon, R. (2007b). Curriculum compacting. Winnipeg, MB: Ecolé Munroe Junior High School. Retrieved May 28, 2008 from http://dxndix.googlepages.com/home Dixon, R. (2007c). Differentiated Instruction. Winnipeg, MB: Ecolé Munroe Junior High School. Retrieved May 28, 2008 from http://dxndix.googlepages.com/home Dixon, R. (2007d). Shared Sight Based Management. Winnipeg, MB: Ecolé Munroe Junior High School. Retrieved May 28, 2008 from http://dxndix.googlepages.com/home Dixon, R. (2007e). The ASAP Program Munroe Junior High. Winnipeg, MB: Ecolé Munroe Junior High School. Retrieved May 28, 2008 from http://dxndix.googlepages.com/home Dolowitz, D. P., & Marsh, D. (2000). Learning from abroad: The role of policy transfer in contemporary policy-making. Governance: An International Journal of Policy Administration, 13 (1), 5-24. Dymond, S. K., Renzaglia, A., & Chun, E. J. (2008). Inclusive high school service learning programs: Methods for and barriers to including students with disabilities. Education & Training in Developmental Disabilities, 43 (1), 20-36. Frederickson, N., Simmonds, E., Evans, L., & Soulsby, C. (2007) Assessing the Social and Affective Outcomes of Inclusion. British Journal of Special Education, 34 (2), 105-115. Friedman, T. L. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the 21st century. New York: Farrar, Strauss, & Giroux. Friendly, M., & Lero, D. S. (2002). Social inclusion through early education and care. Perspectives on Social Inclusion: Working paper series. Toronto, ON: The Laidlaw Foundation. Gately, S. E., & Gately, F. J. (2001). Understanding co-teaching components. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33 (4), 40-47. Retrieved May 28, 2008 from Ebscohost database. Gross, M. (2004). Exceptionally gifted children, 2nd ed. London: RoutledgeFalmer. Gross, M. (2006). Big Fish, Little Pods. Keynote address presented at S.A.G.E. Annual Conference, Calgary, AB. Gregor, A., & Wilson, K. (1984). The development of education in Manitoba. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing. Hall, T. (2002). Differentiated instruction. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. Retrieved May 28, 2008 from http://www.cast.org/publications/ncac/ncac_diffinstruc.html Humphrey, N. (2008). Autistic spectrum and inclusion: Including pupils with autistic spectrum disorders in mainstream schools. Support for Learning, 23 (1), 41-47. Lawton, M. (1996). Study: Site management has no effect on scores. Education Week, 16 (7).

Manitoba Centre for Health Policy (2004). Manitoba Child Health Atlas 2004. Winnipeg, MB: University of Manitoba. Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth (2005). Appropriate educational programming in Manitoba: Standards for student services. Online at: http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/specedu/aep/ Matthews, D. J., & Foster, J. F. (2005). Being smart about gifted children: A guidebook for parents and educators. New York: Great Potential Press. Matthews, D. J., & Foster, J. F. (2006). Mystery to mastery: Shifting paradigms in gifted education. Roeper Review, 28 (2), 64-69. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97. Miller, G. A., Galanter, E., & Pribram, K. H. (1960). Plans and the structure of behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. Miller, M. (2008). What do students think about inclusion? Phi Delta Kappan, 89 (5), 389-391. Mitchell, T. (2007). Co-teaching: A literature review. Unpublished. Contact: Ecolé Munroe Junior High School, Winnipeg, MB. Morgan, H. (1996). An analysis of Gardner's theory of multiple intelligence. Roeper Review, 18, 263-270. Murawski, W. W. (2006). Student outcomes in co-taught secondary English classes: How can we improve? Reading & Writing Quarterly, 22, 227-247. Retrieved May 28, 2008 from Ebscohost database. Pal, L. (2005). Policy communities and networks. In L. A. Pal, Beyond Policy Analysis: Public Issue Management in Turbulent Times. Scarborough, ON: Nelson Education Ltd, pp. 237-283. Renzulli, J.S. (1994). Schools for talent development: A practical plan for total school improvement. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press. Renzulli, J.S., & Reis, S.M. (1985). The schoolwide enrichment model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press. Sacco, V., & Kennedy, L. (2001). The criminal event: Perspectives in space and time, 2nd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing. The Manitoba Teachers’ Society (2004). Teachers and Educational Assistants: Roles and responsibilities. Winnipeg, MB: Author. The Manitoba Teachers’ Society (2008). Sometimes role of EAs becomes unclear. The Manitoba Teacher, 86 (6), 3. Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). Mapping a route towards differentiated instruction. Educational Leadership, 57 (1), 2-6. Treffinger, D. J., & Feldhusen, J. F. (1995). On “Inclusion.” Creative Learning Today, 5 (2), 3. Treffinger, D. J., Sortore, M. R., & McCluskey, K. W. (1995). Giftedness and talent development. Selkirk, MB: Lord Selkirk School Division. VanTassel-Baska, J. (2007). Leadership for the future in gifted education: Presidential address, NAGC, 2006. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51 (1), 5-10. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Walther-Thomas, C. S. (1997). Co-teaching experiences: The benefits and problems that teachers and principals report over time. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20 (4), 395-407. Retrieved May 28, 2008 from Ebscohost database. Winzer, M. (2007). Children with exceptionalities in Canadian classrooms (8th Ed.). Toronto, ON: Pearson Education Canada.