A little insight into our admissions process

Lisa Saunders is back with another guest blog.  This one is really interesting as it gives some terrific insight into what Bridgeway's process is for reviewing and accepting students into our program.  As you'll read, the process is not as straighforward as you might think.

Rhonda

By Lisa Saunders

Of course we have the same sort of discrete problems as the public schooling system: ordering supplies, setting the bell schedule, how many staff to hire and so on; the emergent problems we experience are quite unique.  The public schooling system is called that because they exist to serve the public, they have very few choices in terms of who attends the school other than geographic limitations.  The very issue that is our emergent problem, who is accepted into our program, is more of a discrete problem for them.  Currently, our program is designed for students who meet a specific set of criteria: diagnosed learning disability, no emotional/behavioural issues as a primary concern, no global or cognitive delays and no diagnoses of autism – sounds pretty straight forward, almost as though the decision to accept a student would be considered a discrete problem for us as well, right? 

In answer to this emergent problem we have established an Admission and Review committee, a group of people who each bring different perspectives, expertise and investment into this complex decision-making process.  Involved are a psychologist, neuropsychologist, myself (Director of Programs) and our Executive Director.  Each of us bring to the table various perspectives through which we meet, filter the information each of us have on the topics at hand and arrive at a decision that is implemented and monitored.  Most of our decisions are based on emergent problems in that the effects of our decisions are long reaching and have various outcomes depending on each individual case.

As more and more studies surrounding children’s learning emerge, new diagnoses and ways to diagnose come about in answer to those findings.  Most specifically, the very definition of learning disabilities is changing leaving our Admissions and Review committee with an emergent problem to deal with.  This is not the first emergent problem of this nature we have had to contend with; recently the diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) has become a prevalent occurrence on psycho-educational assessments.  The spectrum is wide-reaching and we have experienced success and disappointments in accepting this new diagnosis under our program umbrella.  The party line remains – no diagnoses of Autism, but ASD doesn’t really fit there any more than it fits and LD diagnosis.   Our acceptance criteria continue to be weighed on a child-by-child basis, however; the impact of being wrong is much more devastating than ordering the wrong kind of printer ink!

The Learning Disabilites Association of Canada defines a learning disability as follows:

Learning Disabilities refer to a number of disorders which may affect the acquisition, organization, retention, understanding or use of verbal or nonverbal information.  These disorders affect learning in individuals who otherwise demonstrate at least average abilities essential for thinking and/or reasoning.  As such, learning disabilities are distinct from global intellectual deficiency.

This is the guideline we follow in determining those students whom we accept into our program.  The trend we are starting to see, though, is a move away from the inclusion of average cognitive ability as part of the diagnostic criteria.  We are receiving psych-ed reports with final diagnosis of an LD, but the child does not have the full scale I Q to support the diagnosis (according to LDAC criteria). 

This is not to say that our program would not help those students who have a cognitive delay and an LD, just that those students will need more intense remediation over a longer period of time.  Parents are only able to rely on Department of Education funding for four years, if they even qualify.  We have based our program on an average three-year stay with a transitional return to alternate education (public, private, post-secondary).  If we begin to admit students who meet the alternative diagnosis of an LD, the guidelines set-up will not meet the needs of the learner.  As well, moving forward we are hoping to incorporate more research within our program, too many variables may not be conducive to providing useful data.

Involvement of the committee members proves an invaluable resource to maintaining and growing our program.  Each member of the committee brings a different perspective, level of experience and investment to the table helping to solve just one category of emergent problems we face.  Although the organizational leader plays a role in this committee, which does not necessarily translate to the role played in the organization-that of leader.  Rather, each participant has a key role in the emergent problem solving process.

If you're interested in more information on Bridgeway's programs or our admissions process, please give Lisa a call at 902-464-0134.