During the 1989-90 school year, a Joint EEA/District Committee began its research and review of issues related to special education teacher workload.  This work continued through the 1990-91 school year, with recommendations being adopted by the bargaining teams in April 1991.  Funding was first available to implement the committee's recommendations during the 1992-93 school year. In the spring of '93,the committee surveyed schools to assess the resource utilization.  The survey indicated that, in general, funds were being used within the overall program goals for ideas such as: collaboration work between staff, planning for at-risk students, and learning about strategies. 

The following describes our shared expectations.

Philosophical Basis

The District and the Association enjoy a relationship based on mutual respect, cooperation, and trust.  Special education policy and vision are evolving; both special education and regular education teachers are expected to be involved in the planning and dialogue related to the ongoing evolution process.

We know that workload issues for special education teachers are not addressed by the class load relief formulae (Section 6.7) of the PA.  Usually these workload issues arise from building-based decisions about how to assign special education staff.  We also know that staff perceptions regarding one another's workload need to be addressed.   Comments received during the spring '93 assessment reminded us that we need to continue to emphasize mutual trust among staff.  We acknowledge that special education teachers have added legal responsibilities related to special education students.  These teachers have  opened up their work and responsibilities to the site based decision making process. It is important that we be sensitive to their special knowledge and skills and that they be accorded the respect given other departments.

Our intent is to support dialogue, planning and problem solving between regular program and special education teachers to address program related concerns.  Because of the program variability among buildings and among programs and the commitment to site-based decision making, we are choosing not to define special education teacher workload with numbers.  We feel that numerical formulae to address special education teacher workload concerns might limit buildings in designing and implementing creative programs and in assigning staff.

To assist in positively resolving these issues, resources are being allocated to each school to fund the critical process of dialogue, planning and problem solving between special education and regular education teachers.  The funds can be used in a variety of ways, e.g., for substitutes to create release time or for additional time for collaboration.  We support other creative ways to provide time to accomplish these tasks.  Our belief is that the resulting targeted dialogue will promote mutual appreciation, understanding, and cooperation.

Implementation Expectations

Funds as described in Section 6.7.B.5 of the 1998-2001 PA will be dispersed annually in equal amounts to all elementary, middle, and high schools ($938 for each school) with a .5 share each to Maplewood School and the Early Childhood Programs ($469 each program).

The resources described above are being provided to each school with the following expectations:

          !    the Child Study Team leader in each school will be responsible for initiating an annual discussion formulating a plan for utilization of resources and communicating with staff.  Each plan should include how staff roles might be designed to meet student and staff needs, how these funds might support special ed teacher workload, and should meet the additional parameters noted below

!     that annual planning for program decisions, the assignment of special education teachers, and ongoing problem solving will be carried out in a shared decision-making process utilizing the Draft 5 guidelines

         !     those interested in or affected by the special education program in the                     building will have an opportunity to develop the annual program plan                     and to participate in ongoing problem solving

          !   the annual plan will address both students' and staff members' needs

          !   that building staff will be assisted when consensus is difficult or                     information is needed (e.g., program managers could come and join                     building groups to provide information or to facilitate consensus)

            !   the annual plan will be shared with all certificated staff by a brief staff                     discussion in each school led by building staff and administrators.

 September 8, 1995