2 Chapter 2: Canadian School Systems

Introduction

“Inclusion is a philosophy that embraces the idea that everyone has something of value to contribute and that everyone has a right to belong.”

~ Lisa Friedman

This chapter provides an overview of the Canadian education system, from legislation to curriculum, examining overarching themes and the similarities and differences between provinces. Beyond the curriculum, we introduce the concept of inclusive education, outlining the foundational guiding principles and discussing practical applications. Lastly, we consider factors that make a school environment “healthy,” digging into educator well-being, school-based well-being initiatives, and ways in which educators and school psychologists can foster equity, diversity, and inclusivity in Canadian schools.

 

Legislation and Regulation

Federal Legislation

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the Charter) received royal assent in 1982, inscribing basic rules and fundamental freedoms defining citizenship at both federal and provincial levels of government (Government of Canada, 2022). The Charter states:

Every individual is equal before and under the law and has a right to equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age, or mental or physical disability (Department of Justice Canada, 2022).

The principles of the Charter supersede all legislation in Canada and all laws, including those pertaining to education, protecting the fundamental rights of all people above all else. There is no education or curriculum-specific section in the Charter, but sections of the Charter are relevant to education. For example, Section 32(1) outlines how people are to be treated within the public domain—extending to educational environments—and Section 23 guarantees the protection of minority language rights in education (Department of Justice Canada, 2022). Importantly, Section 93 of the constitution of 1867, also known as the British North America Act, delegates the responsibility of education to the provinces (Government of Canada, 2022; The Canadian Information Centre for International Credentials, 2022).

Provincial Legislation

Canada is the only country among its industrialized counterparts not to have a national educational department, making the Canadian public school system a decentralized system at a federal level (Wallner, 2012). At the provincial level, the public school system is centralized, with each province implementing a provincial office or Minister of Education for oversight. Each province has an Education Act that dictates the right of every individual in Canada to public education and regulates and defines the roles of the Minister of Education, school boards, professionals within each school, and the rights of students and their families (School Advocacy, 2006). Interestingly, the provincial public school systems are remarkably similar between provinces, likely due to the limited variability between provincial Education Acts. Where differences occur, geographical/regional, social, and political differences play a role between provinces.

Supplemental to the Education Act are regulations that guide professionals in specific areas, such as identifying exceptional students in Ontario (Regulation 181/98) and regulating the discipline of students due to behavioural issues (Regulation 472/07). Furthermore, in Nova Scotia, several regulations have been created to cover areas such as the public school program, Council on Mi’kmaq Education, African Canadian Education, and the appeal process (Government of Nova Scotia, 2021). These regulations ensure continuity across provincial education systems and that students are taught similarly between different schools within a province.

The federal system may be decentralized, but the provinces do not work in a vacuum. The Council of Ministers of Education in Canada (CMEC), implemented by provincial Ministers of Education, fosters collaboration between provincial education bodies, international education bodies, and the federal government. The CMEC makes it possible for provinces to compare educational outcomes while acknowledging that each province is responsible for creating and implementing educational services.

School Types in Canada

Private Schools

There are two types of non-public schools in Canada: private and independent. Both are similar in that they are ‘independent’ or separate from the provincial government. Generally, private schools are for-profit institutions that do not adhere to the same provincial regulations as public schools (Canadian Accredited Independent Schools, 2021). Independent schools are typically not-for-profit institutions that hold charitable status and have a Board of Governors or Trustees for oversight. In most situations, independent schools are regulated and accountable to their Board of Governors, while private schools are held to less regulation and accountability.

Private institutions that do not receive funding from the provincial government are generally not regulated, accountable, or accredited by the provincial government. These institutions often create their curriculum and follow independent hiring practices. Currently, only Quebec and British Columbia ensure that public and private schools uphold the provincial curriculum and employ certified teachers (Van Pelt, Hasan, & Allison, 2017). Access is disregarded in this analysis of independent and public schools, as much of the time, private schools are, by their nature, inaccessible to a substantial portion of the population.

In British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Quebec, provincial funding for private schools often requires that the school meet specific standards; thus, private schools are more commonly funded by student tuition fees and endowment funds (Our Kids, 2022). Other provinces may provide funding for students to access specialized private institutions for a limited time. This focuses on preparing the student to re-enter the public school system with the necessary support and tools in place. For instance, Nova Scotia may provide students with tuition support for private schools that feature specialized programs for children with learning disabilities (LD), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), or autism spectrum disorder (ASD) who cannot obtain necessary support within the public school system (Province of Nova Scotia, 2022). Currently, only three private institutions are eligible for the program.

Public Schools

In contrast to private schools, public schools are funded by a combination of targeted federal government transfer funds (typically reserved for early childhood development and post-secondary institutions), provincial funding, and local taxes (Council of Ministers of Education, Canada, n.d.). In 2019-2020, $74.7 billion, nearly a quarter (22%) of the total gross domestic product, was reserved for public education, down 1.4% from the previous fiscal year (Statistics Canada, 2022).

School boards play a pivotal role by receiving and allocating this funding to individual schools within their district. Provinces have anywhere from one school board—as is the case in Prince Edward Island—to 72 in Ontario, overseeing anywhere from approximately 5,000 students to over 1.8 million (Canadian School Boards Association, 2018). Allocation of funding to individual schools is based on several factors, including grade level (e.g., elementary or secondary school), special education needs, and the size of the student population (Toronto District School Board, 2022). The size of the student population is critical as additional financial support for library resources, school office resources, school council, and professional development are all calculated based on a dollar amount per student.

Schools in Indigenous Communities

In 2007 the United Nations upheld Indigenous peoples’ right to education. Indigenous children in Canada residing on Indigenous reserves typically attend federal or provincially funded band-operated schools, offering Indigenous-focused education (Council of Ministers of Education, Canada, n.d.). Between 2016 and 2018, the federal government invested $3.6 billion towards on-reserve primary and secondary education through Indigenous Services Canada (Indigenous Services Canada, 2019). This funding supported several key areas of Indigenous education across all provinces, including a new Maskawacîs Cree School System. Additionally, school connectivity, language and culture programming, and special education have increased across all provinces (Government of Canada, 2021). Even still, Indigenous school boards overseeing this sort of funding remain rare, present only in Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, and Quebec (Canadian School Boards Association – Indigenous Education Committee, 2018). Currently, most provincially funded Indigenous schools must implement provincial curriculum, although flexibility remains around culture, language, and history.

Literature examining Indigenous education remains scarce. What little there are focuses on curriculum, financial and social support, and incorporating Indigenous voices within historically colonized structures (Canadian School Boards Association – Indigenous Education Committee, 2018). Yet, Indigenous education benefits both Indigenous and non-Indigenous youth as it diversifies the curriculum, providing a more balanced and culturally responsive portrayal of the development of Canada. The purpose of Indigenous education should not be to ‘other’ or divide but to counter historical stigma and bias, promoting Indigenous youth within and outside of educational structures. School psychologists can play an integral role in promoting culturally responsive education, assessments, and interventions, which will be discussed more broadly in later sections.

Curriculum

International and National Standards

Ample research has found that a country’s educational outcomes increase economic growth, community satisfaction, and well-being among individuals (The Conference Board of Canada, 2014). The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), developed and implemented by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in 2000, compares educational outcomes internationally by testing 15-year-olds across three learning domains—reading, math, and science (OECD, 2022). Table 1 provides the 2018 global ranking of OECD countries based on students’ overall average scores across the three testing domains. Canada ranks eighth overall, ranking 6^th in reading, 12^th in mathematics, and 8^th in science. Nationally, three provinces outrank the Canadian average: British Columbia, Ontario, and Alberta (The Conference Board of Canada, 2014).

Table 1 PISA 2018 Worldwide Ranking

Sourced From (FactsMap, 2020)

In 2014, the Conference Board of Canada asked whether Canadian students had the necessary skills in the three learning domains needed to succeed post-graduation. Figure 1 provides an overview of the findings, showing that most students manage to graduate from high school. Still, only those from British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec, and Alberta are prepared to succeed.

Figure 1

K-12 Education Indicators: Do students have the necessary skills to succeed post-graduation

[Figure_1_K-12_Education Image; Sourced from: (The Conference Board of Canada, 2014)]

Similarities and Differences Between Provincial School Systems

All provinces focus on literacy in the three primary learning domains—reading (English/French), mathematics, and science. Literacy in a subject is demonstrated by a student’s well-rounded understanding of and adequate engagement with topics in each domain. For instance, in mathematics, instead of having students solve problems through repetition, students work in groups to ask and generate questions, discover patterns, and think beyond the problem and toward more real-world situations (Draper, 2002). The following provides insight into the similarities and differences between five provinces—Nova Scotia, Quebec, Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia.

Nova Scotia

In Nova Scotia, children are mandated to attend school from 5 to 16, but anyone aged 5 to 21 has a right to public education (NS Department of Education and Early Chlidhood Development, 2022). The typical progression of education in Nova Scotia begins at five years old with grade primary. Students participate in elementary school until grade 6, focusing on language, fine arts, health education, mathematics, science, social studies, and music. After grade 6, they move on to junior high for grades 7 to 9, where they focus on Gaelic and Aboriginal culture and language, technology, textile arts and design, healthy living, and food and nutrition. Lastly, they progress to high school for grades 10 to 12, cultivating skills in arts, business education and entrepreneurship, career education, family studies, Gaelic language, mathematics, science, technology, and skilled trades, such as construction, manufacturing, and transportation, with co-operative learning options (Government of Nova Scotia, n.d.). This breakdown by grade groups varies depending on geographical location and school board (Government of Nova Scotia, n.d.).

The Council of Atlantic Ministers of Education and Training continues to evolve Nova Scotia’s curriculum, implementing several modalities, including arts-connected, experiential, personalized inquiry, play-based, and social and emotional learning to enhance learning outcomes and focus on student success (Government of Nova Scotia, n.d.). Additionally, community-based learning involves various partners who work together to provide students with personalized growth opportunities and establish connections between students and the community. This equips students with valuable opportunities for their future (Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, 2022).

Quebec

Students in Quebec attend elementary school from grades 1 to 6 and high school from grades 7 to 11, making Quebec the only public school system not to have grade 12. In place of grade 12, students complete the first level of post-secondary education through the Collège d’Enseignement General et Professionnel (CEGEP) (Federation des cegeps, 2022). CEGEP is a public institution that offers over 125 areas of study across three categories: technical programs, pre-university, and short-duration programs. Most programs take two years to complete, at which point students are eligible to attend university, typically only needing three years to complete a bachelor’s degree. Importantly, post-secondary institutions in Quebec are more heavily regulated than their counterparts in other provinces.

The public school curriculum in Quebec, the Quebec Education Program (QEP), is rooted in developing a multifaceted understanding and appreciation for Quebec society (Gouvernement du Quebec, 2022). The QEP is rigorous, outlining standards across all learning domains that must be met each year for children to move forward. Each area of the QEP has a dedicated Progression of Learning (QLP), guiding educators in creating their lesson plans, and a Framework for Evaluation of Learning, providing guidelines for student evaluation by subject and the basis for provincial report cards.

Ontario

Ontario’s education system has several unique features. First, it is divided into three stages, with early childhood education beginning at birth and extending to 6 years old, followed by elementary school from kindergarten to grade 8, and secondary school from grade 9 through 12 (People for Education, 2022). Second, Ontario has four provincially funded school boards—English and French public and English and French catholic—and is the only province to publicly fund religious school boards (Ministry of Education, 2022). Third, parents are encouraged to participate in achieving their child’s learning goals. To that end, the Government of Ontario provides parents with an overview of the curriculum fostering at-home discussions and helping hold the province accountable for students’ learning outcomes.

Curriculum, created and implemented by the Minister of Education, varies by grade level and school board language (English or French). Beginning in elementary school, the curriculum differs between the English and French school boards, with the French curriculum including additional courses, which carry on into secondary school. Like other provinces, the curriculum focuses on the three main learning domains—reading, mathematics, and science—beginning as young as kindergarten (Government of Ontario, 2022). Unique to Ontario, secondary education curriculum includes advanced topics, including American Sign Language as a second language and First Nations, Métis, and Inuit Studies.

The approach to learning in Ontario’s curriculum can be broken down into two streams: transferable skills and cross-curricular and integrated learning. Transferable skills include critical problem-solving, innovation and entrepreneurship, self-directed learning, global citizenship and sustainability and digital literacy (Government of Ontario, 2022). Cross-curricular and integrated learning include several areas of literacy, such as financial, critical thinking, and mathematical, and educational streams, such as STEM, Indigenous, and environmental education.

Alberta

A combination of Nova Scotia and Ontario, Alberta’s education system is divided into four stages: early childhood, elementary, junior high and senior high school (Government of Alberta, 2022). Alberta incorporates a standardized curriculum for all public schools through the Minister of Education. It has also recently implemented ‘LearnAlberta,’ a virtual platform that engages teachers, parents, and students, providing additional resources, an e-tutoring hub, and a student learning hub (Government of Alberta, 2022).

In September 2022, Alberta began an elementary education pilot program focused on student outcomes across four areas—literacy, numeracy, citizenship, and practical skills in areas such as literature and fine arts, French immersion and French as a first language, mathematics and science, physical education, and social studies (Government of Alberta, 2022). The curriculum for grades 7 to 12, currently under review in Alberta, includes similar subjects as Quebec’s and Ontario’s curriculum, aside from standout courses such as career and life management, technology foundations, ethics, and health and life skills.

Based on PISA scores, Alberta is one of the leading provinces in reading, mathematics, and science (Government of Alberta, 2022). In fact, as of 2015, only one country was ahead of Alberta in Science (i.e., Singapore), no country exceeded Alberta in reading, and only seven countries were significantly ahead in mathematics. As Alberta continues to redesign their curriculum, these scores will be of focus to ensure Alberta continues to be an educational powerhouse.

British Columbia

Like Quebec, British Columbia’s (BC) education system has two stages: elementary and secondary education. The curriculum, developed and implemented by BC’s Ministry of Education and Child Care, is consistent with most other provinces (Government of British Columbia, n.d.). A collective mandate has been developed to highlight and focus the educational curriculum in three sections—intellectual development, human and social development, and career development (Province of British Columbia, n.d.). Five continuous improvement categories highlight student success: student-centered learning, future orientation, high and measurable standards, healthy and effective learning environments, and quality teaching and leadership. In a recent redesign, the curriculum shifted to include personalized and flexible learning environments and ‘Historical Wrongs’—wrongs committed against Asian and South Asian communities in BC—and Aboriginal perspectives. Aboriginal perspectives extend a student’s understanding of Aboriginal culture and incorporate place-based learning and Indigenous ways of knowing through several modalities of the educational curriculum.

Overall, there are more similarities than differences across provinces. Although there is no overarching federal guideline for the implementation and maintenance of education, Canadian provinces create centralized systems that make it possible for Canada to continue to be a global education leader.

The Role of the School Psychologist in Canada

All provinces agree that school psychologists should focus on assessment, intervention, prevention, program evaluation, research, and social-emotional development (Jordan et al., 2009). Yet, the practice of school psychology differs significantly from province to province, facing numerous challenges when it comes to fulfilling the many facets of this role. In 2001 the Mutual Recognition Agreement made it possible for registered school psychologists to move between provinces, but this is complicated by differences in role definition, training, and even registration between provinces (Jordan et al., 2009).

Given increasingly diverse student needs and limited time and resources, school psychologists have focused exclusively on assessing and diagnosing students’ learning or behavioural disorders (Huebner & Gilman, 2003). This approach limits opportunities for school psychologists to engage in what Corkum et al. (2007) found to be their preferred workload, namely a diverse role including assessment, prevention, intervention, and counselling in collaboration with educators, counsellors, and families. School psychologists bring a plethora of valuable skills that, if allowed the time and space for implementation, could positively impact student outcomes in elementary and secondary schools. In addition, provinces with early childhood education programs, such as Alberta and Ontario, could dramatically benefit by extending the role of school psychologists to preventatively assess and address student needs in collaboration with early educators and families (Hojnoski & Missall, 2006). Thus, extending the school psychologists’ role by taking a preventative approach to education.

Inclusive Education

Students across Canada have increasingly diverse life experiences and learning needs. To address these needs and meet the expectations of the Charter, education systems across Canada have embraced an inclusive approach to education. The term “inclusive education” grew out of the United Nations Salamanca Statement, which called for inclusivity in schools as an effective way to overcome discriminatory attitudes and establish welcoming communities that cultivate educational access for all (UNESCO, 1994). Since its creation, the term has continued to evolve around primary conceptualizations of inclusion as outlined by Ainscow et al. (2009):

Inclusion as concerned with marginalized groups, Dis(Ability), ‘special educational needs, and disciplinary exclusions’: While often the most common approach to inclusion, it may unintentionally lead to exclusion by drawing attention to categorization, which may inhibit inclusivity and limit individual participation.

Inclusion as promotion of the school or education for all concepts: This concept is based on UNESCO’s ‘Education for All’ agenda, which is focused on increasing global access to and participation in education.

Inclusion as a principled approach: This approach highlights inclusive values and ethics, such as equity, participation, and diversity, to guide policy and practice rather than focusing on specific groups and risking potential stigmatization (Lauchlan & Boyle, 2007).

To bring inclusive education into the schools, policymakers and educators proposed multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS)—a targeted problem-solving approach to addressing student need through screening and regular progress monitoring (Freeman et al., 2015). To provide meaningful education for all students, the MTSS are guided by fundamental principles, such as universal design for learning (UDL), least restrictive environment (LRE), differentiated instruction (DI), and student- and identity-first language. In addition, the MTSS relies on the use of adaptations, accommodations, modifications and evidence-based practices (i.e., interventions based on proven quality and efficacy) to further the establishment of inclusive education across classrooms (Hoagwood & Johnson, 2003). The proceeding section aims to provide insight into the principles and practice of inclusive education and discusses school psychologists’ role in fostering inclusivity within the education system.

Universal Design for Learning (UDL)

Universal design for learning (UDL) was developed by the Centre for Applied Special Technology (CAST) as an inclusive framework for developing lesson plans for diverse learners and is an appropriate approach for students at all levels (Meyer et al., 2014; Thomas et al., 2015). UDL uses proactive, flexible instructional design and technology to meet diverse needs and improve the learning process for all students (Rose et al., 2005; Navarro et al., 2016). UDL is founded on three principles for overcoming barriers specific to the learning environment: representation, action and expression, and engagement (Meyer et al., 2014).

Representation: The belief that there are many ways to represent knowledge. To achieve this, instructional materials and content must be flexible and accessible to diverse learners. The use of scaffolding (i.e., systematically building on students’ knowledge through multiple examples, simplifying problems, and pre-teaching content) is an essential tool and facilitates more profound engagement with and broader access to developing knowledge (Coyne et al., 2010; Hitchcock et al., 2002).

Action and Expression: The belief that learning style and demonstration of knowledge vary based on the student’s unique needs. Thus, demonstration of knowledge can and should take various forms (e.g., traditional written reports, creative, hands-on projects, and verbal presentations).

Engagement: The belief that there are multiple ways of representing knowledge and demonstrating knowledge comprehension through action and expression. Engagement is rooted in the empowerment of students by providing choices that acknowledge the diversity of learners. In addition, engagement has been linked to increased intrinsic motivation and peer-mediated learning in students (Winter, 2016).

The UDL framework expands on these principles by providing guidelines and specific checkpoints, attempting to navigate common barriers and providing guidance for educators to design flexible curricula (Meyer et al., 2014). In recent years, technology has become an increasingly essential tool for teachers’ knowledge representation and students’ action and engagement. Moving forward, educators must carefully consider the principles of UDL as they integrate technology to create customized scaffolded learning experiences that consider the diverse learning needs of their students (Pisha & Coyne, 2001).

Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)

Least restrictive environment (LRE) is a guiding principle of inclusive education. It means that students, whatever their needs and as much as possible, be in the same classroom as other students of a similar age without disabilities (McGovern, 2015). It is essential to understand that LRE is not about the place—the classroom—but about the opportunity for students to engage with peers as unrestrictedly as possible, actively limiting the stigmatization of diverse needs within the educational context (Yell et al., 1998). Born out of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), a federal spending program that incorporated a mandate for free appropriate public education for all school children regardless of ability, the principle of LRE remains controversial due to confusion over how best to approach the practice of it (Rozalski et al., 2010). The MTSS encourages educators to turn to the guiding principles and tools of inclusive education for direction on providing LRE, including the use of differentiated instruction and student-first language, as well as the incorporation of targeted adaptations, modifications, and evidence-based practices to establish LRE for all students under their purview. Figure 2 provides a snapshot of the spectrum of LRE learning environments available to students and educators.

Figure 2

Spectrum of LRE learning environments

[Figure_2_Least Restrictive Environment Image redesigned in Canva by Lindsay Heyland

Sourced from: (Hunt, 2015)]

Differentiated Instruction (DI)

Differentiated instruction (DI) is a pedagogical approach to teaching students with diverse needs and learning modes within the same classroom, matching the learning plan to the needs and abilities of the learner (Stradling & Saunders, 1993). This teaching philosophy is proactive and student-centered, grounding deliberate adaptations in ongoing student assessment (Tomlinson et al., 2003). Like the principle of UDL, DI emphasizes flexibility, encouraging educators to take multiple approaches to lesson planning and evaluation while considering students’ unique needs, such as their readiness to learn, life circumstances, and previous knowledge and experiences (Griful-Freixenet et al., 2020; Tomlinson, 1999). Rock et al. (2008) further outlined four guiding principles for DI, including a focus on essential ideas and skills in each content area, responsiveness to individual student differences, integrated assessment and instruction, and ongoing adjustment of content, direction, and learning materials to meet the student’s learning needs.

In practice, DI relies heavily on educators and their mastery of student-centered lesson planning, as well as their ability to provide ongoing monitoring and assessment to foster the changing needs of individual students (van Geel et al., 2018). In their systematic review of DI in secondary education, Smalle-Jacobse et al. (2019) found severe knowledge gaps in implementing DI among educators, calling for additional training for educators to develop confidence and mastery of the skills needed to achieve DI. Given the mastery required to successfully implement DI, additional focus may be needed in training educators in the future.

Student- and Identity-First Language

Student- or person-first language is the practice of referring to an individual before their disability, recognizing them as a person above all else, and treating their disability as a neutral characteristic or attribute (Dunn & Andrews, 2015). Beatrice Wright (1991) first objected to language that dehumanized individuals by labelling and categorizing them by their disabilities and kicked off a new appreciation for the power of language to promote respect, equity, human dignity and reduce stigmatization and bias. Student-first language actively avoids describing individuals as “victims” of, “suffering” from, or “afflicted” by their diagnosis and instead treats diagnoses as straightforward secondary descriptors (Dunn et al., 2013; Foley & Santamaria Graff, 2018). For example, one should say, “Michael has been diagnosed with a learning disability” rather than “Michael suffers from a learning disability” or “That’s Michael, the learning-disabled student.” Other examples of affirmative student-first phrases are provided in Table 2.

Table 2

Examples of student-first language

Affirmative phrases	Negative phrases
She has an intellectual, cognitive, developmental disability	Retarded, mentally defective
He is blind or visually impaired	The blind
They have a disability	The disabled or handicapped
She is deaf/hard of hearing	The deaf or suffers hearing loss
He is of a short stature (or a little person)	Dwarf, midget
They use a wheelchair/mobility chair	Wheelchair bound; confined to
She has a physical disability	Crippled, lame, deformed
He is unable to speak/uses synthetic speech	Dumb, mute
They have a psychiatric disability	Crazy, nuts

Sourced from: (Lodgson, 2020)

While student-first language is often the preferred approach, as it emphasizes the individual and not their disability, there has been a recent call for identity-first language, which celebrates and reappropriates identities that have historically been labelled negatively (Brown, 1995). Identity-first language is often used when describing an individual as part of a larger group of people with a particular disability, for example, saying “disabled people” instead of “people with disabilities.” It is a careful distinction and one that is meant to honour an individual’s connection to disability culture, thus fostering an appreciation for human diversity, acceptance, and the natural interdependence of the community (Gill, 1995). While there is no clear consensus regarding the most preferred language among most individuals with disabilities, among autistic people there is a clear consensus regarding the most offensive language. Research has found using the student- or person-first “person with autism” or “person with autism spectrum disorder/condition” to be the least preferred, while “autistic” and “autistic person” remain the most preferred terminology (Bury et al., 2020; Kapp et al., 2013).

This difference in preferred language highlights the inherent power of language to shape and perpetuate ideologies and the need for individuals to have a say in the language being used to define them (Bottema-Beutel et al., 2021). Whether through student-first language, identity-first language, or a combination of the two, the goal of educators should be to foster an environment in which students can share their preferences for language, allowing them to define themselves amongst their peers.

[Adaptation_Image, Sourced from: (Chow Hon Lam, 2022)]

Adaptations, Accommodations, and Modifications
Where UDL seeks inclusion by providing flexible curriculum design and implementation, and LRE and student-first language target inclusion by expanding the classroom to include diverse learners and foster open discussion of individuals’ needs, adaptations, accommodations, and modifications as outlined in Table 3 are practical tools that make it possible for students with diverse needs to set and achieve educational goals alongside their peers (McGlynn & Kelly, 2019). In short, adaptations and accommodations change how a student learns, while modifications alter what a student learns, considering their unique abilities (Sasser, 2017; Zollman, 2019).

Table 3

Defining adaptations, accommodations, and modifications

Term	Definition	Example
Adaptations	Changes to the learning environment, including available equipment and student-centred assignment design	Use of headphones to block noise Access to sensory tools for excess energy Instructions provided in multiple modalities (e.g., auditory, visual) Access to tools (e.g., highlighter, calculator) Additional time for assignments
Accommodations	Interchangeable with the term adaptations
Modifications	Changes made to the content or skills that students are expected to master	Providing materials at the student’s reading level, instead of at grade level Group work with a single outcome Read aloud and explain questions Allow dictation for open-ended questions

Sourced from: (Njie et al., 2018)

Unfortunately, the inconsistent use of adaptations and accommodations over the last twenty years has resulted in confusion and dissatisfaction with them as a tool for individualized learning (Njie et al., 2018). Given this history of confusion, Njie et al. (2018) sought to clarify the purpose of these tools by redefining their use. Accommodations—namely changes to the learning environment—are targeted toward students for whom grade-level curriculum and learning outcomes are attainable and require successful completion of grade-level programming. Modifications are reserved for students who require alterations to grade-level curriculum and outcomes and address specific identified or diagnosed learning needs, including enrichment for students working beyond grade level and support for those working below the current grade level. An additional tool, individual education plans, focus on the strengths and needs of only those students who require customized curriculum and individualized learning outcomes. Figure 3 outlines these three elements of individualized programming that make inclusive education possible while supporting diverse student learning needs.

Figure 3

Individualized program options

[Figure 3_Individualized_program options image; Sourced from: (Njie et al., 2018)]

Evidence-Based Practice (EBP)

Evidence-based practices (EBPs), namely interventions grounded in current research and found to be efficacious and of high quality and validity, make the practice of inclusive education possible by targeting the needs of individual students without removing them from their classroom (Hoagwood & Johnson, 2003; Hoagwood et al., 2009). Initial operational criteria for EBPs were outlined by the Division of Clinical Psychology of the American Psychological Association in 1998, establishing two rigorous categories of EBP— “well-established” and “probably efficacious” (Lonigan et al., 1998). However, criticism over real-world limitations in implementing and assessing EBPs meeting the initial operational criteria resulted in a broadening of criteria to include measures of “effectiveness” which account for cost, number of sessions, delivery setting, cultural applicability, and long-term functional outcomes (Chorpita et al., 2002).

The benefits of EBPs include faster results, increased likelihood of positive student outcomes, accountability, and responsivity to a student’s needs (IRIS Centre, 2014). Nevertheless, significant barriers exist to implementing EBPs in the classroom, particularly the overwhelming challenge educators face in researching and selecting appropriate EBPs (Durlak, 2015; Forman et al., 2013). Due to limited available time for research, educators are often forced to turn to EBPs they are familiar with, which may not be the best fit for a student (Shaw, 2021). This may explain why even though there are numerous practical, school-targeted practices available (Burke & Loeber, 2017; Greenberg et al., 2001; Hoagwood et al., 2007; Taylor et al., 2017), there remains poor program adoption within schools (Ennett et al., 2003).

Currently, EBPs are underutilized tools that foster inclusive educational goals by targeting the specific needs of students, allowing them to participate in their classroom while achieving appropriate learning outcomes. Yet, more deliberate collaboration with school psychologists may provide essential guidance on using EBPs, as 75% of school psychology programs provide critical training on EBPs and emphasize the need to stay engaged with current research (Hicks et al., 2014).

The Role of School Psychologists in Fostering Inclusive Education

Up to this point in our discussion of inclusive education, the focus has been predominantly on the classroom, and the role educators play in fostering inclusive environments through implementing guiding principles such as UDL, LRE, DI, and student-first language. School psychologists, while often focused on early detection through assessment and progress monitoring, are uniquely positioned to support educators in selecting and implementing EBPs to meet diverse student needs (Hicks et al., 2014). Yet, barriers to collaboration with educators on the selection and implementation of EBPs exist, often due to competing priorities, lack of clarity in roles related to implementation, and limited time available for collaboration on both assessment and progress monitoring between educators and school psychologists (Corkum et al., 2007; Fuchs & Fuchs, 2017; Silva et al., 2020). Given the recent calls by policymakers to expand inclusive education and the pivotal role they layout for EBP implementation, school psychologists and educators have an opportunity to argue for dedicated time to effectively collaborate on the selection and implementation of EBPs relevant to students with diverse needs (Njie et al., 2018). Thus, school psychologists play an essential role in fostering inclusive education by extending the principles of inclusive education beyond the classroom and supporting the implementation of student-centered EBPs that make diverse learning within an inclusive environment possible.

Issues in Public Education

Healthy School Environments

One of the primary goals of inclusive education is to establish a healthy school environment that contributes to the community and fosters flourishing among students and staff. However, recent challenges, notably the COVID-19 pandemic, dramatically and negatively impacted the educational environment, diminishing educators’ lesson plans and reducing students’ learning outcomes (Hargreaves, 2021). During the pandemic, schools experienced faculty and staff shortages, disruption of essential student supports (e.g., food security efforts, mental health services, extracurricular activities) and academic learning, as well as social isolation and increased exposure to adverse childhood experiences within the home and family unit (Golberstein et al., 2020). Schools also experienced a dramatic increase in educator burnout—a depressive syndrome characterized by exhaustion, cynicism, and inefficacy in response to chronic emotional and interpersonal stressors (Bianchi & Schonfeld, 2016; Maslach et al., 1996; Wilson, 2021). With educators and administrators struggling to stay engaged and students experiencing unprecedented isolation and unpredictability, it is no surprise that students’ mental, social-emotional, and academic learning outcomes suffered in the wake of the pandemic (Song et al., 2022; Whitley et al., 2021).

School psychologists, as key mental health support staff, play an essential role in re-establishing the school environment as staff and students return to the classroom (Rosenfield, 2021). By leading the implementation of well-being initiatives in schools, school psychologists can positively impact students, educators, and the community. The following section discusses a variety of well-being initiatives targeted at educators and disaster response, addressing the feasibility and sustainability of positive mental health promotions within schools.

Educator Well-being

Compared to other professions worldwide, educators have the highest level of work-related stress and burnout (Stoeber & Rennert, 2008). Educators’ ability to support learning and care for students is intrinsically impacted by their physical and emotional well-being (Gray et al., 2017; Sisask et al., 2014; Sutton & Wheatley, 2003). The recent increase in educator burnout (Wilson, 2021) may negatively contribute to job retention (Arens & Morin, 2016) and educators’ motivation and commitment to their work (Collie & Perry, 2019), negatively impacting the inclusive education environment and students’ learning outcomes at large. A recent study found that educators were not alone in experiencing burnout, pointing out that 92% of school psychologists report experiencing burnout at some point in their careers (Schilling & Randolph, 2017). Common causes of burnout across education have included the experience of role responsibility overload (Wang et al., 2016), school policy, and limited administrative support (Schilling et al., 2017; Talmor et al., 2005).

Well-being Initiatives in Schools

Educators are the greatest asset schools have; thus, their well-being is essential if they are to cultivate well-being among their students (Roffey, 2012). Positive psychology—believed to enhance and maintain positive well-being—provides a variety of efficacious and accessible interventions to promote educator well-being (Parks & Schueller, 2014; Sheldon & Lyubomirsky, 2006). PERMA, the most common positive psychology intervention model, identifies accessible interventions across five pillars (Falecki & Mann, 2020). Table 4 provides an overview of the five pillars of PERMA and practical interventions associated with each pillar that enhance well-being, the results of which have been shown to positively affect educator self-confidence, personal agency, and resilience (Le Cornu, 2013).

 

Table 4

Interventions to develop teacher well–being

PERMA Pillar	Intervention
Positive emotion	Count your blessings Keep a gratitude journal Identify ‘three good things’ and why they happened Identify what works well Establish a gratitude wall Encourage emotional literacy Mindfulness exercises
Engagement	Take the VIA Character Profile to identify Signature strengths Have character strengths conversations with colleagues Identify strengths overplayed and underplayed Reflect on Explanatory style Practice Optimistic Thinking (ABCDE) Set meaningful goals
Relationships	Practice Active Construction Responding Issue Thank you Cards or Gratitude cards Establish “Caught you doing well” moments Establish a Random Acts of Kindness week Participate in Mentoring programs Learn Coaching Psychology skills Encourage positive social events Provide access to who and how to seek support
Meaning	Reflect on core values and how we live them Write about our best self at work Visualize success and positive impact Job Crafting Track your progress Scaffold milestones
Accomplishment	Use an “Achievement List” instead of a “To-Do” list each day Peer Observations to track what is working well Goal setting with multiple pathways Engage in solution-focused conversations Celebrate moments of positive impact

Sourced from: (Falecki & Mann, 2020)

EBPs targeting educator well-being often focus on developing specific skills, such as mindfulness—known to reduce burnout and negative affect and improve sleep hygiene (Abenavoli et al., 2013)—or combine multiple well-being practices to create programs that can be presented as part of professional development days or via online platforms. In their study of an eight-week educator mindfulness program, Flook et al. (2013) found a reduction in stress and an increase in self-compassion. Similarly, in a randomized block-controlled study, Cook et al. (2016) found that the ACHIEVER Resilience Curriculum—a program that combines multiple well-being practices (e.g., mindfulness, gratitude, sleep hygiene, values clarification) into a single program targeted to educators—experienced reduced job-related stress, improved teaching self-efficacy, and increased intentions to implement EBPs in classrooms. Lastly, Grant et al. (2010) noted that coached groups of educators, compared to non-coached groups, experienced less stress, greater resilience, better relationship with others, and an improved sense of workplace well-being. Thus, providing access to simple interventions and strategies, such as those outlined in Table 4, can help to address educator stress (Arens & Morin, 2016).

Reimaging the Role of School Psychologists

For years prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, school psychologists called for a balanced approach to their practice, in which considerable time was designated to implementing preventative mental health measures for staff and students (Corkum et al., 2007; Hann, 2001; King et al., 2021). Unfortunately, with the rise in school psychologist burnout, only magnified by the extended COVID-19 disaster, it has not been possible to carve out time to implement preventative measures (Ritchie et al., 2021). Unlike the return to schools following WWII, school psychologists and educators are set to face an impossible task if individualized assessment and planning remain the norm (Caplan & Caplan, 1993). It is time to revisit the role of school psychologists, taking a public health and preventative model perspective that considers the needs of schools, families, and communities. Recently, Herman et al. (2021) made a case for a public health model that shifts focus from individual care to considering environmental factors beyond the classroom. Such an approach would benefit more students, educators, and schools and subsequently address challenges associated with the limited number of school psychologists within the education system (Walcott & Hyson, 2018). An example of this shift, as put forward by VanDerHeyden & Burns (2018), moved away from assessment as a predictor, suggesting that assessment should be used productively, namely when it will result in a targeted intervention or positive student outcome. Instead, the focus should be on support staff working with students to foster academic skills and subskills and holding off on assessment until a student has had sufficient exposure to instructional strategies and meaningful change is anticipated (VanDerHeyden & Burns, 2018). To summarize, following the COVID-19 pandemic, the current individualized approach provided by school psychologists is neither feasible nor sustainable and systemic approaches must be considered to address the academic, behavioural, and social/emotional state of students as they return to the classroom.

Fostering Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Schools

Essential to the development of an inclusive educational environment is equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI), or the practice of creating inclusive and diverse spaces where individuals can prosper without prejudice or discrimination. Equity is the practice of treating all individuals equally. There are two distinct types of equity within education: (1) educational equity, which focuses on demographics, fostering students from diverse backgrounds to increase graduation rates, but lacks assessment of the quality of learning or measuring post-graduate success, and (2) developmental equity, which focuses on student’s educational relationships and experiences, fostering success later in life rather than focusing solely on good grades (Price-Mitchell, 2016).

Overall, the adoption of EDI practices varies dramatically, and, to date, little attention has been paid to EDI within elementary and secondary education. Inclusive education and EDI go hand in hand, and EDI should guide inclusive education by addressing historical stigmas, inequities and consciously fostering safe environments in which students with diverse abilities and backgrounds can flourish. That said, incorporating EDI into the education system begins with acknowledging historical inequities perpetrated by or associated with the Canadian education system.

Black Learners Advisory Committee (BLAC) Report

While Canada did not impose outright segregation laws, it did perpetuate segregation and discrimination. Several provinces maintained segregated schools until 1977, including Nova Scotia, Quebec, and Ontario, with the last school closing in 1983 in Nova Scotia. In 1994, the Black Learners Advisory Committee (BLAC) provided the Nova Scotia Government with the BLAC Report, highlighting educational inequities faced by Black communities in Nova Scotia (Delmore “Buddy” Daye Learning Institute, 2022). The BLAC report made 46 recommendations, several of which focused on including Black community members in creating and implementing educational curricula. The report also made specific recommendations, including hiring Black teachers and establishing youth support groups within Black communities.

Even with increased awareness and access to educational institutions, Black students feel disconnected from the school community and curricula in Canada (Hamilton-Hinch et al., 2022). This is due to the inadequate Black representation among educational professionals, who could aid in developing a more relevant curriculum and fostering more welcoming school environments. Nonetheless, all educational professionals, regardless of their race or background, must be taught the historical significance of racial minorities within Canadian contexts, emphasizing the importance of cultivating EDI in educational environments.

Indian Residential Schools

In addition to Black segregated schools, Canada has a history of Indian residential schools, a form of segregation of Indigenous people in Canada that lasted for over 160 years, only ending in Saskatchewan in 1996 (Indigenous Peoples Atlas of Canada, n.d.). Over 150,000 Indigenous children across Canada—excluding Newfoundland and Labrador, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island—attended church-run, federally funded schools designed to assimilate Indigenous individuals and communities (McCracken, 2019). While residential schools no longer exist, Canadian educational systems remain entrenched in colonial systems that disregard Indigenous culture, tradition, and language. Currently, colonized educational environments are attempting to integrate Indigenous culture into their curricula, turning to the Indigenous community for guidance on how best to undertake meaningful inclusion.

Role of School Psychologist: Implementing and Sustaining EDI Practices

School psychologists can play an integral role in fostering and promoting EDI in elementary and secondary education by implementing personalized intervention programs that align with inclusive educational values while focusing on cultivating creativity alongside academic achievement. In addition, school psychology training programs should not only incorporate cultural diversity training but promote diversity amongst their students—increasing diverse voices within the field of school psychology—as well as offer practical training opportunities in diverse communities, exposing students to clients from a wide variety of cultures and backgrounds.

Addressing EDI begins with acknowledging our internal, implicit, and unconscious biases—namely, unconsciously held negative attitudes and associated stereotypes towards individuals, communities, or societies. School psychologists and educators can act as role models educating students about common internal biases in school communities and developing tools for navigating them. Overall, there are three important goals school psychologists should keep in mind when incorporating and promoting EDI in schools: (1) ensure that the field progresses at a similar rate as community diversity, (2) consider other relevant factors such as socioeconomic status, culture, tradition, and language, when interpreting a student’s behaviour, and (3) incorporate culturally sensitive assessments, diagnoses, and interventions, focusing on the needs of individual students.

Conclusion

The Canadian school system, while federally decentralized, manages to outrank several OECD countries in learning outcomes. This is due to ongoing interprovincial collaboration and mandated student attendance across childhood and adolescence. In this chapter, we outlined the role of the government in Canadian school systems, highlighting similarities and differences between provinces and pointing to the evolution of inclusive education across Canada. Educators, administrators, and school psychologists continuously work together to promote healthy school settings. Using affirmative language, accessibility adaptations and modifications, and making conscious efforts to reduce historical stigmas, the Canadian school system is evolving to meet the needs of increasingly diverse student populations.

School psychologists play a unique and pivotal role in meeting these diverse needs, including collaborating with educators and acting as clinical professionals, offering assessment and targeted instructional activities while promoting equity, diversity, and inclusivity in the school. In addition, they are the most likely to introduce evidence-based practices into classrooms, facilitating greater individualized learning for students. Now that you understand the Canadian school system, it is time to take a deep dive into the psychology of learning to better understand how to reach learners with a spectrum of unique needs.

 

References

Abenavoli, R. M., Jennings, P. A., Greenberg, M. T., Harris, A. R., & Katz, D. A. (2013). The protective effects of mindfulness against burnout among educators. Psychology of Education Review, 37(2), 57–69.

Abrokwa, F. (2022, February 9). 6 Strategies for Promoting Diversity and Inclusion at Your School. Retrieved from Education Week: https://www.edweek.org/leadership/opinion-6-strategies-for-promoting-diversity-and-inclusion-at-your-school/2022/01

African Nova Scotian Affairs. (2022, November). African Heritage Month Narratives: Week Three. Retrieved from Government of Nova Scotia: https://ansa.novascotia.ca/content/african-heritage-month-narratives-week-three

Ainscow, M., Booth, T., & Dyson, A. (2009). Improving schools, developing inclusion. Routledge.

Arens, A. K., & Morin, A. J. (2016). Relations between teachers’ emotional exhaustion and students’ educational outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(6), 800–813. https://doi.org/10.1037/ edu0000105

Bianchi, R., & Schonfeld, I. S. (2016). Burnout is associated with a depressive cognitive style. Personality and Individual Differences, 100, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.01.008

Bilias-Lolis, E., Gelber, N. W., Rispoli, K. M., Bray, M. A., & Maykel, C. (2017). On promoting understanding and equity through compassionate educational practices: Toward a new inclusion. Psychology in the Schools, 54(10), 1229-1237. doi:10.1002/pits.22077

Bottema-Beutel, K., Kapp, S. K., Lester, J. N., Sasson, N. J., & Hand, B. N. (2021). Avoiding ableist language: Suggestions for autism researchers. Autism in Adulthood, 3(1), 18–29. https://doi.org/10.1089/aut.2020.0014

Brown, S. E. (1995). A celebration of diversity: An introductory, annotated bibliography about disability culture. Disability Studies Quarterly, 15, 36 –55.

Burke, J. D., & Loeber, R. (2017). Evidence-based interventions for oppositional defiant disorder in children and adolescents. In L. Theodore (Ed.), Handbook of evidence-based interventions for children and adolescents (pp. 181–192). essay, Springer.

Bury, S. M., Jellett, R., Spoor, J. R., & Hedley, D. (2020). “It defines who I am” or “it’s something I have”: What language do [autistic] Australian adults [on the autism spectrum] prefer? Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04425-3

Canadian Accredited Independent Schools. (2021). What is Independent Education? Retrieved from Canadian Accredited Independent Schools: https://www.cais.ca/families/what-is-independent-education#:~:text=Independent schools are not ‘private,be eligible for tax receipts.

Canadian School Boards Association – Indigenous Education Committee. (2018, January). Indigenous Education Structure, Initiatives and Promising Practices. Retrieved from Canadian School Boards Association: https://cdnsba.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Indigenous-Education-Structure-Initiatives-and-Promising-Practices.pdf

Canadian School Boards Association. (2018, April). Cross Country Overview: Canadian School Board Structure and Trustee Profile. Retrieved from Canadian School Boards Association: http://cdnsba.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Cross-Country-Overview-and-Trustee-Profile-FINAL-.pdf

Caplan, G., & Caplan, R. (1993). Mental health consultation and collaboration. Jossey-Bass.

Cartwright, F., & Allen, M. K. (2002). Understanding the rural-urban reading gap. Statistics Canada, Human Resources Development Canada. Ottawa: Minister of Industry.

Chorpita, B. F., Yim, L. M., Donkervoet, J. C., Arensdorf, A., Amundsen, M. J., McGee, C., Serrano, A., Yates, A., Burns, J. A., & Morelli, P. (2002). Toward large-scale implementation of empirically supported treatments for children: A review and observations by the Hawaii empirical basis to services task force. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 9(2), 165–190. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2850.2002.tb00504.xCorkum, P., French, F., & Dorey, H. (2007). School psychology in Nova Scotia: A survey of current practices and preferred future roles. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 22(1), 108-120. doi:10.1177/0829573507301121

Collie, R., & Perry, N. (2019). Cultivating teacher thriving through social–emotional competence and its development. The Australian Educational Researcher, 46(4), 699–714. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s13384-019-00342-2

Cook, C. R., Miller, F. G., Fiat, A., Renshaw, T., Frye, M., Joseph, G., & Decano, P. (2016). Promoting secondary teachers’ well-being and intentions to implement evidence-based practices: Randomized evaluation of the achiever resilience curriculum. Psychology in the Schools, 54(1), 13–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21980

Corkum, P., French, F., & Dorey, H. (2007). School psychology in Nova Scotia: A survey of current practices and preferred future roles. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 22(1), 108–120. doi:10.1177/0829573507301121

Council of Ministers of Education, Canada. (n.d.). Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Retrieved from CMEC: https://www.cmec.ca/251/Programme_for_International_Student_Assessment_(PISA).html.

Council of Ministers of Education, Canada. (n.d.). Council of Ministers of Education, Canada. Retrieved from CMEC: https://www.cmec.ca/299/education-in-canada-an-overview/index.html

Courey, S. J., Tappe, P., Siker, J., & LePage, P. (2013). Improved lesson planning with universal design for learning (UDL). Teacher Education and Special Education, 36(1), 7–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406412446178

Coyne, P., Pisha, B., Dalton, B., Zeph, L. A., & Smith, N. C. (2010). Literacy by design. Remedial and Special Education, 33(3), 162–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932510381651

Delmore “Buddy” Daye Learning Institute. (2022). Our History. Retrieved from Delmore “Buddy” Daye Learning Institute: https://dbdli.ca/our-organization/our-history/#:~:text=In 1991, the Black Learners,for African Nova Scotian learners.

Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. (2022). Community-Based Learning. Retrieved from Education and Early Childhood Development: https://www.ednet.ns.ca/cbl/

Department of Justice Canada. (2022, 04 14). Section 15 – Equality Rights. Retrieved from Canada’s System of Justice: https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art15.html#:~:text=Provision,or mental or physical disability.

Department of Justice Canada. (2022, 04 14). Section 32(1) – Application of the Charter. Retrieved from Government of Canada: https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art321.html#:~:text=The text of section 32,govern relations between private actors.

Draper, R. J. (2002). School mathematics reform, constructivism, and literacy: A case for literacy instruction in the reform-oriented math classroom. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(6), 520–529. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/40014740

Dunn, D. S., & Andrews, E. E. (2015). Person-first and identity-first language: Developing psychologists’ cultural competence using disability language. American Psychologist, 70(3), 255–264. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038636

Dunn, D. S., Fisher, D. J., & Beard, B. M. (2013). Disability as diversity rather than (in)difference: Understanding others’ experiences through one’s own. In D. S. Dunn, R. A. R. Gurung, K. Naufel, & J.H. Wilson (Eds.), Controversy in the psychology classroom: Using hot topics to foster critical thinking (pp. 209–223). essay, American Psychological Association.

Durlak, J. A. (2015). Studying program implementation is not easy but it is essential. Prevention Science, 16(8), 1123–1127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-015-0606-3

Eagle, J. W., Dowd-Eagle, S. E., Snyder, A., & Holtzman, E. G. (2015). Implementing a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS: Collaboration between school psychologists and administrators to promote systems-level change. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 25(2-3), 160-177. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2014.929960

Education GPS. (2022, November 13). Canada: Student Performance (PISA 2018). Retrieved from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: https://gpseducation.oecd.org/CountryProfile?primaryCountry=CAN&treshold=10&topic=PI

Ennett, S. T., Ringwalt, C. L., Thorne, J., Rohrbach, L. A., Vincus, A., Simons-Rudolph, A., & Jones, S. (2003). A comparison of current practice in school-based substance use prevention programs with meta-analysis findings. Prevention Science, 4, 1–14. https//doi.org/10.1023/a:1021777109369

FactsMap. (2020). PISA 2018 Worldwide Ranking – average score of mathematics, science and reading. Retrieved from FactsMap: https://factsmaps.com/pisa-2018-worldwide-ranking-average-score-of-mathematics-science-reading/

Falecki, D., & Mann, E. (2020). Practical applications for building teacher wellbeing in education. In C. F. Mansfield (Ed.), Cultivating teacher resilience: International approaches, applications and impact (pp. 175–191). essay, Springer.

Federation des cegeps. (2022). What is a CEGEP? Retrieved from Les CEGEPS du Quebec: https://www.cegepsquebec.ca/en/cegeps/presentation/what-is-a-cegep/#:~:text=What is a cégep, anyway,level of post-secondary education.

Flook, L., Goldberg, S. B., Pinger, L., Bonus, K., & Davidson, R. J. (2013). Mindfulness for teachers: A pilot study to assess effects on stress, burnout and teaching efficacy. Mind Brain Education, 7(3), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12026.

Foley, M., & Santamaria Graff, C. (2018, July 20). Getting started with person-first language. Edutopia. Retrieved November 16, 2022, from https://www.edutopia.org/article/getting-started-person-first-language/

Forman, S. G., Shapiro, E. S., Codding, R. S., Gonzales, J. E., Reddy, L. A., Rosenfield, S. A., Sanetti, L.M.H., Stoiber, K. C. (2013). Implementation science and school psychology. School Psychology Quarterly, 28, 77–100. https//doi.org/10.1037/spq0000019

Freeman, R., Miller, D., & Newcomer, L. (2015). Integration of academic and behavioral MTSS at the district level using implementation science. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 13, 59–72. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1080597.pdf

Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2017). Critique of the National Evaluation of response to intervention: A case for simpler frameworks. Exceptional Children, 83(3), 255–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402917693580

Fuentes, M. A., Zelaya, D. G., & Madsen, J. W. (2021). Rethinking the Course Syllabus: Considerations for promoting equity, diversity, and inclusion. Teaching of Psychology, 48(1), 69-79. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628320959979

Gill, C. J. (1995). A psychological view of disability culture. Disability Studies Quarterly, 15, 15–19.

Golberstein, E., Wen, H., & Miller, B. F. (2020). Coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) and Mental Health for Children and Adolescents. JAMA Pediatrics, 174(9), 819. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.1456

Gouvernement du Quebec. (2022). Quebec Education Program. Retrieved from Quebec Education Program – Ministere de l’Education: http://www.education.gouv.qc.ca/en/teachers/quebec-education-program/

Government of Alberta. (2022). Alberta’s school system. Retrieved from Alberta: https://www.alberta.ca/albertas-school-system.aspx

Government of Alberta. (2022). K to 6 Curriculum Renewal: Overview. Retrieved from Curriculum and Programs of Study: https://www.alberta.ca/curriculum.aspx

Government of Alberta. (2022). Welcome to the new LearnAlberta. Retrieved from LearnAlberta Curriculum: https://curriculum.learnalberta.ca/home/en

Government of British Columbia. (n.d.). BC’s Redesigned Curriculum: An Orientation Guide. Retrieved from B.C. Curriculum: https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/sites/curriculum.gov.bc.ca/files/pdf/supports/curriculum_brochure.pdf

Government of Canada. (2019, August 29). Federal transfers to provinces and territories. Retrieved from Department of Finance Canada: https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/programs/federal-transfers.html

Government of Canada. (2021, June 9). Progress on investments in kindergarten to grade 12 education. Retrieved from Government of Canada: https://www.sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1547586037360/1547586058040

Government of Canada. (2022, 03 24). Guide to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Retrieved from Government of Canada: https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/how-rights-protected/guide-canadian-charter-rights-freedoms.html

Government of Canada. (2022, 11 10). VI. Distribution of Legislative Powers: Powers of the Parliament. Retrieved from Justice Laws Website: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-3.html

Government of Canda. (2022, 11 10). The Constitution Acts, 1867-1982. Retrieved from Justice Laws Website: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-12.html#:~:text=Fundamental Freedoms&text=(a) freedom of conscience and,(d) freedom of association.

Government of Nova Scotia. (2021, 09 24). Ministerial Education Act Regulations made under Section 97 of the Education Act: Table of Contents. Retrieved from Government of Nova Scotia: https://www.novascotia.ca/just/REGULATIONS/regs/edmin.htm

Government of Nova Scotia. (n.d.). English Programs. Retrieved from Curriculum: https://curriculum.novascotia.ca/english-programs#blocktabs-english_curricula-1

Government of Nova Scotia. (n.d.). High School Full Course List. Retrieved from Curriculum: https://curriculum.novascotia.ca/english-programs/high-school/full-course-list

Government of Nova Scotia. (n.d.). Nova Scotia Curriculum. Retrieved from Education and Early Childhood Development: https://www.ednet.ns.ca/psp/home

Government of Ontario. (2022, August 16). Kindergarten. Retrieved from Ontario: https://www.ontario.ca/page/kindergarten

Government of Ontario. (2022). Transferable Skills. Retrieved from Curriculum and Resources: https://www.dcp.edu.gov.on.ca/en/program-planning/transferable-skills

Government of Ontario. (2022). Welcome, parents! Resources to support your child’s learning. Retrieved from Curiculum and Resources: https://www.dcp.edu.gov.on.ca/en/parents

Government of Ontario. (2022). What is Curriculum? About the Ontario Curriculum. Retrieved from Curriculum and Resources: https://www.dcp.edu.gov.on.ca/en/what-is-curriculum/about-the-ontario-curriculum

Gray, C., Wilcox, G., & Nordstokke, D. (2017). Teacher mental health, School climate, inclusive education and student learning: A review. Canadian Psychology, 58, 203–210. https://doi.org/10. 1037/cap0000117

Greenberg, M. T., Domitrovich, C., & Bumbarger, B. (2001). The Prevention of Mental Disorders in school-aged children: Current state of the field. Prevention & Treatment, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1037/1522-3736.4.1.41a

Griful-Freixenet, J., Struyven, K., Vantieghem, W., & Gheyssens, E. (2020). Exploring the Interrelationship between Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and differentiated instruction (DI): A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 29, 100306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.100306

Hamilton-Hinch, B.-A., McIsaac, J.-L. D., Harkins, M. J., Jarvis, S., & LeBlanc, J. C. (2022). A call for change in the public education system in Nova Scotia. Canadian Journal of Education, 44(1), 65-92. doi:https://doi.org/10.53967/cje-rce.v44i1.5025

Hann, S. G. (2001). School psychology in nova scotia. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 16(2), 19–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/082957350101600204

Hargreaves, A. (2021). What the COVID-19 pandemic has taught us about teachers and teaching. FACETS, 6, 1835–1863. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2021-0084

Herman, K. C., Reinke, W. M., Thompson, A. M., Hawley, K. M., Wallis, K., Stormont, M., & Peters, C. (2021). A public health approach to reducing the societal prevalence and burden of youth mental health problems: Introduction to the special issue. School Psychology Review, 50(1), 8–16. https:// doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2020.1827682

Hicks, T. B., Shahidullah, J. D., Carlson, J. S., & Palejwala, M. H. (2014). Nationally Certified School Psychologists’ use and reported barriers to using evidence-based interventions in schools: The influence of Graduate Program Training and education. School Psychology Quarterly, 29(4), 469–487. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000059

Hitchcock, C., Meyer, A., Rose, D., & Jackson, R. (2002). Providing new access to the general curriculum. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35(2), 8–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990203500201

Hoagwood, K. E., Serene Olin, S., Kerker, B. D., Kratochwill, T. R., Crowe, M., & Saka, N. (2007). Empirically based school interventions targeted at academic and mental health functioning. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 15(2), 66–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/10634266070150020301

Hoagwood K., & Johnson J. (2003). School psychology: A public health framework. Journal of School Psychology, 41(1), 3 – 21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4405(02)00141-3

Hoagwood, K., Burns, B. J., & Weisz, J. R. (2009). A profitable conjunction: From science to service in Children’s Mental Health. In B. J. Burns & K. Hoagwood (Eds.), Community treatment for youth: Evidence-based interventions for severe emotional and behavioral disorders. (pp. 1079–1089). essay, Oxford University Press.

Hojnoski, R. L., & Missall, K. N. (2006). Addressing school readiness: Expanding school psychology in early education. School Psychology Review, 35(4), 602-614. doi:10.1080/02796015.2006.12087964

Huebner, E. S., & Gilman, R. (2003). Toward a focus on positive psychology in school psychology. School Psychology Quarterly, 18(2), 99-102. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.msvu.ca/10.1521/scpq.18.2.99.21862

Hunt, C. (2015). Least restrictive environment. ThingLink. Retrieved November 28, 2022, from https://www.thinglink.com/scene/708455600446504961 Indigenous Peoples Atlas of Canada. (n.d.). History of Residential Schools. Retrieved from Canadian Geographic: https://indigenouspeoplesatlasofcanada.ca/article/history-of-residential-schools/

Indigenous Services Canada. (2019, January 22). New funding and policy approach for First Nations kindergarten to grade 12 education. Retrieved from Government of Canada: https://www.canada.ca/en/indigenous-services-canada/news/2019/01/new-funding-and-policy-approach-for-first-nations-kindergarten-to-grade-12-education.html

IRIS Centre. (2014). Evidence-based practices (part 1): Identifying and selecting a practice or program. IRIS Center. Retrieved November 16, 2022, from https://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/ebp_01/

Jordan, J. J., Hindes, Y. L., & Saklofske, D. H. (2009). School psychology in Canada. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 24(3), 245-264. doi:10.1177/0829573509338614

Kapp, S. K., Gillespie-Lynch, K., Sherman, L. E., & Hutman, T. (2013). Deficit, difference, or both? Autism and neurodiversity. Developmental Psychology, 49(1), 59–71. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028353

King, S., Khalil, M., & McGonnell, M. (2021). School psychology practice in Nova Scotia: An update and implications for role diversification. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 37(2), 189–203. https://doi.org/10.1177/08295735211037810

LaForett, D. R., & De Marco, A. (2020). A logic model for educator-level intervention research to reduce racial disparities in student suspension and expulsion. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 26(3), 295-305. doi:10.1037/cdp0000303

Lansu, T. A., Cillessen, A. H., & Bukowski, W. M. (2013). Implicit and explicit peer evaluation: Associations with early adolescents’ prosociality, aggression, and bullying. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 23(4), 762-771. doi:10.1111/jora.12028

Lauchlan, F., & Boyle, C. (2007). Is the use of labels in special education helpful? Support for Learning, 22(1), 36–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9604.2007.00443.x

Le Cornu, R. (2013). Building early career teacher resilience: The role of relationships. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2013v38n4.4.

Logsdon, A. (2020, May 17). Why person-first language is used to talk about disabilities. Verywell Family. Retrieved November 21, 2022, from https://www.verywellfamily.com/focus-on-the-person-first-is-good-etiquette-2161897

Lopez, E. C., & Bursztyn, A. M. (2013). Future challenges and opportunities: Toward culturally responsive training in school psychology. Psychology in the Schools, 50(3), 212-228. doi:10.1002/pits.21674

Lonigan, C. J., Elbert, J. C., & Johnson, S. B. (1998). Empirically supported psychosocial interventions for children: An overview. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 27(2), 138–145. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15374424jccp2702_1

McCracken, K. (2019). Challenging colonial spaces: Reconciliation and decolonizing work in Canadian archives. Canadian Historical Review, 100(2), 182-201. doi:10.3138/chr.2018-0033

McGlynn, K., & Kelly, J. (2019). Adaptations, modifications, and accommodations. Science Scope, 43(3), 36-41. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26899082

McGovern, M. (2015). Least restrictive environment: fulfilling the promises of idea. Widener

Law Review, 21(1), 117-[ii].

Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. T. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and Practice. CAST Professional Publishing, an imprint of CAST, Inc.

Ministry of Education. (2022). Facts About Elementary and Secondary Education. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Kings Printer for Ontario. Retrieved from Ontario.ca: https://www.ontario.ca/page/facts-about-elementary-and-secondary-education

National Center on Education and the Economy. (2021). Canada- NCEE. Retrieved from NCEE: https://ncee.org/country/canada/#:~:text=Standards and Curriculum,, ministry-established common curriculum.

Navarro, S. B., P. Zeveras, R. F. Gesa, and D. G. Sampson. (2016). “Developing Teachers’ Competencies for Designing Inclusive Learning Experiences.” Educational Technology & Society, 19(1), 17–27.

Njie, A., Shae, S., & Williams, M. (2018). Students first: Inclusive education that supports teaching, learning, and success of all Nova Scotia students. Commission on Inclusive Education, Province of Nova Scotia. https://inclusiveedns.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/CIE-Students-First-WEBreport-2.pdf

NS Department of Education and Early Chlidhood Development. (2022). Going to School in Nova Scotia. Retrieved from Education and Early Childhood Development: https://www.ednet.ns.ca/going-school-nova-scotia

Ontario Catholic School Trustees’ Association. (2022). The Facts About Education in Ontario. Retrieved from Ontario Catholic School Trustees’ Association: https://www.ocsta.on.ca/about-ocsta/the-facts-ontario-education/

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2022). Programme for International Student Assessment. Retrieved from Programme for International Student Assessment: https://www.oecd.org/pisa/

Our Kids. (2022). Provincial funding for private schools. Retrieved from Our Kids: The Trusted Source: https://www.ourkids.net/school/provincial-funding-for-private-schools#:~:text=Certified private schools that meet,amount paid to public schools.

Parks, A. C., & Schueller, S. (2014). The Wiley Blackwell handbook of positive psychological interventions. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.

People for Education. (2022). Public Education in Ontario. Retrieved from People for Education: https://peopleforeducation.ca/public-education-in-ontario/#:~:text=How the education system works,from grade 9 to 12.

Pisha, B., & Coyne, P. (2001). Smart from the start. Remedial and Special Education, 22(4), 197–203. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193250102200402

Price-Mitchell, M. (2016, October 6). Developmental Equity: Path to Student Success? Retrieved from Psychology Today: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-moment-youth/201610/developmental-equity-path-student-success

Province of British Columbia. (n.d.). Vision for Student Success. Retrieved from British Columbia: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/education-training/k-12/administration/program-management/vision-for-student-success

Province of Nova Scotia. (2022). Tuition Support. Retrieved from Tuition Support: Education and Early Childhood Development: https://tuitionsupport.ednet.ns.ca/#:~:text=The TSP provides funding which,5 campuses) in Nova Scotia.

Ritchie, T., Rogers, M., & Ford, L. (2021). Impact of covid-19 on school psychology practices in Canada. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 36(4), 358–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/08295735211039738

Rock, M. L., Gregg, M., Ellis, E., & Gable, R. A. (2008). REACG: A framework for differentiating classroom instruction. Preventing School Failure, 52(2), 31–47

Roffey, S. (2012). Pupil wellbeing—Teacher wellbeing: Two sides of the same coin? Educational and Child Psychology, 29(4), 8–17.

Rose, D. H., Meyer, A., & Hitchcock, C. (2011). The universally designed classroom: Accessible curriculum and Digital Technologies. Harvard Education Press.

Rosenfield, S. (2021). Strengthening the school in school psychology training and Practice. School Psychology Review, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966x.2021.1993032

Rozalski, M., Stewart, A., & Miller, J. (2010). How to determine the least restrictive environment for students with disabilities. Exceptionality, 18(3), 151–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2010.491991

Sasser, N. (2017). Adaptations vs. modifications in special education. Classroom. Retrieved November 16, 2022, from https://classroom.synonym.com/adaptations-vs-modifications-special-education-12459.html

Schilling, E. J., & Randolph, M. (2017). School psychologists and job burnout: what can we learn as trainers? Trainers’ Forum: The Journal of the Trainers of School Psychologists, Winter, 69–94.

Schilling, E. J., Randolph, M., & Boan-Lenzo, C. (2017). Job burnout in school psychology: How big is the problem? Contemporary School Psychology, 22(3), 324–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-017-0138-x

Shaw, S. (2021). Implementing evidence-based practices in school psychology:  excavation by de-implementing the disproved. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 36(2), 91–97. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/m2c3k

Sheldon, K.M., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2006). How to increase and sustain positive emotion: The effects of expressing gratitude and visualizing best possible selves. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(2), 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760500510676.

Silva, M. R., Collier-Meek, M. A., Codding, R. S., Kleinert, W. L., & Feinberg, A. (2020). Data Collection and analysis in response-to-intervention: A survey of school psychologists. Contemporary School Psychology, 25(4), 554–571. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-020-00280-2

Sisask, M., Värnik, P., Värnik, A., Apter, A., Balazs, J., Balint, M., Bobes, J., Brunner, R., Corcoran, P., Cosman, D., Feldman, D., Haring, C., Kahn, J.-P., Poštuvan, V., Tubiana, A., Sarchiapone, M., Wasserman, C., Carli, V., Hoven, C. W., & Wasserman, D. (2014). Teacher satisfaction with school and psychological well-being affects their readiness to help children with mental health problems. Health Education Journal, 73(4), 382–393. https://doi.org/10.1177/0017896913485742

School Advocacy. (2006). Education Law and Policy. Retrieved from School Advocacy Hamilton: http://www.schooladvocacy.ca/left_level3/law_policy.html#:~:text=The Education Act sets in,responsibilities of parents and students.

SchoolWix. (n.d.). School Age Calculator Canada. Retrieved from SchoolWix: https://schoolwix.com/ca

Smale-Jacobse, A. E., Meijer, A., Helms-Lorenz, M., & Maulana, R. (2019). Differentiated instruction in secondary education: A systematic review of research evidence. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02366

Song, S. Y., Wang, C., Espelage, D. L., Fenning, P. A., & Jimerson, S. R. (2022). Covid-19 and School Psychology: Research reveals the persistent impacts on parents and students, and the promise of school telehealth supports. School Psychology Review, 51(2), 127–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966x.2022.2044237

Statistics Canada. (2022, March 22). Public and private spending on elementary and secondary schools, 2019/2020. Retrieved from The Daily: Statistics Canada: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/220322/dq220322f-eng.htm

Stoeber, J., & Rennert, D. (2008). Perfectionism in school teachers: Relations with stress appraisals, coping styles, and burnout. Anxiety Stress and Coping, 21(1), 37–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/106 15800701742461.

Stradling, B., & Saunders, L. (1993). Differentiation in practice: Responding to the needs of all pupils. Educational Research, 35(2), 127–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013188930350202

Sutton, R. E., & Wheatley, K. F. (2003). Teachers’ emotions and teaching: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 15(4), 327–358. https://doi.org/10. 1023/A:1026131715856

Talmor, R., Reiter*, S., & Feigin, N. (2005). Factors relating to regular education teacher burnout in inclusive education. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 20(4), 455–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250500298012

Taylor, R. D., Oberle, E., Durlak, J. A., & Weissberg, R. P. (2017). Promoting positive youth development through school-based social and emotional learning interventions: A meta-analysis of follow-up effects. Child Development, 88(4), 1156–1171. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12864

The Canadian Information Centre for International Credentials. (2016, July). Academic Credentials in Canada. Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Retrieved from https://www.cicic.ca/1149/academic_credentials.canada

The Canadian Information Centre for International Credentials. (2022). Ministries/departments responsible for education in Canada. Retrieved from CICIC: https://www.cicic.ca/1301/ministries_departments_responsible_for_education_in_canada.canada

The Conference Board of Canada. (2014, June). Education and Skills. Retrieved from The Conference Board of Canada: https://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/provincial/education.aspx

Thomas, C. N., Van Garderen, D., Scheuermann, A., & Lee, E. J. (2015). Applying a universal design for Learning Framework to mediate the language demands of mathematics. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 31(3), 207–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2015.1030988

Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Tomlinson, C. A., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Brimijoin, K., Conover, L. A., & Reynolds, T. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2-3), 119–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320302700203

Toronto District School Board. (2022). School Budget Allocations. Retrieved from About Us: https://www.tdsb.on.ca/About-Us/Business-Services/Budgets-and-Financial-Statements/School-Budget-Allocations

UNESCO. (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. Paris: UNESCO.

United Nations Human Rights. (2007, September 13). 24. United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Retrieved from OHCHR: https://www.ohchr.org/en/resources/educators/human-rights-education-training/24-united-nations-declaration-rights-indigenous-peoples-2007

United Nations Human Rights Council. (2017). Report of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent on its mission in Canada. New York: United Nations. Retrieved from https://ansa.novascotia.ca/sites/default/files/files/report-of-the-working-group-of-experts-on-people-of-african-descent-on-its-mission-to-canada.pdf

University of the People. (2022). Understanding the Canadian Education System. Retrieved from University of the People: https://www.uopeople.edu/blog/understanding-the-canadian-education-system/#:~:text=Students are required by law,earned a high school diploma.

VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Burns, M. K. (2018). Improving decision making in school psychology: Making a difference in the lives of students, not just a prediction about their lives. School Psychology Review, 47(4), 385–395. https://doi/10.17105/SPR-2018-0042.V47-4

van Geel, M., Keuning, T., Frèrejean, J., Dolmans, D., van Merriënboer, J., & Visscher, A. J. (2018). Capturing the complexity of differentiated instruction. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 30(1), 51–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2018.1539013

Van Pelt, D., Hasan, S., & Allison, D. J. (2017, October 3). The Funding and Regulation of Independent Schools in Canada. Retrieved from Fraser Institute: https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies/funding-and-regulation-of-independent-schools-in-canada

Walcott, C. M., & Hyson, D. (2018). Results from the NASP 2015 membership survey, part one: Demographics and employment conditions (Research report). National Association of School Psychologists.

Wallner, J. (2012). Political structures, social diversity, and public policy: Comparing mandatory education in Canda and the United States. Comparative Political Studies, 45(7), 850-874. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414011428590

Wang, W., Yin, H., & Huang, S. (2016). The missing links between job demand and exhaustion and satisfaction: testing a moderated mediation model. Journal of Management and Organization, 22(1), 8095.

Whitley, J., Beauchamp, M. H., & Brown, C. (2021). The impact of covid-19 on the learning and achievement of vulnerable Canadian children and Youth. FACETS, 6, 1693–1713. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2021-0096

Wilson, J. (2021, November 3). Record number of teachers experiencing Burnout. Canadian Occupational Safety. Retrieved November 16, 2022, from https://www.thesafetymag.com/ca/topics/psychological-safety/record-number-of-teachers-experiencing-burnout/315415

Winter, G. (2016). Examining Changes in Teachers’ Lesson Plans Following Universal Design for Learning Training. Doctoral Dissertation. ProQuest. (10160010).

Wright, B. A. (1991). Labeling: The need for greater person-environment individuation. In C. R. Snyder & D. R. Forsyth (Eds.), Handbook of Social and Clinical Psychology the Health Perspective (pp. 469–487). essay, Pergamon Press.

Yell, M. L., Rogers, D., & Rogers, E. L. (1998). The legal history of special education. Remedial and Special Education, 19(4), 219–228. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193259801900405

Zollman, E. M. (2019). Accommodations vs. modifications: What’s the difference? Handy Handouts. Retrieved November 16, 2022, from https://www.handyhandouts.com/viewHandout.aspx?hh_number=422&nfp_title=Accommodations vs. Modifications: What’s The Difference?