BCEdAccess Society

There have been a lot of really important discussions happening on social media, outside of our parent and caregiver Facebook group as well as inside our group. Our first blog on this topic is called Moving the Needle – Needing Change in Education. We were asking for people to share with us their thoughts and concerns about this tracker.

Here is a summary of the concerns parents are raising. Some parents were willing to provide their own statements to contribute to this blog. They are below the summary.

1. Privacy & Ethics

One of the top concerns we are hearing related to this tracker is privacy and how the information is collected. There are concerns that the questions in the survey are going to expose a child, with potential harmful effects. Students could be socially ostracized and further excluded, pushed out of school. The ethical foundation of the survey is questioned. Parents’ comments below speak more to this issue in detail.

Questions around the legality of this collection tool have been raised by parents as well as by the Surrey School District.

At the bottom of the tracker form, it states:

“We have been advised by the Surrey School District that they have legal concerns regarding the 2 questions that were at the bottom of this survey. We have removed them for now, pending legal review.”

2. Reliability of the Data

The way the tracker is designed, it is very easy to have skewed data, making the data that is collected useless and over-exaggerated. There are concerns that this is providing data about the wrong information rather than what we should be focused on. It is not student-centred. This data, without context, is dangerous.

As the tracker progresses, BCEdAccess will elevate the lived experience of our parents to guide our advocacy work. We have reached out to Surrey DPAC to engage in dialogue, and we have asked for a meeting.

Please reach out to BCEdAccess if you have any concerns. We would love to hear from you. Consulting with our parents and caregivers is always ongoing. As advocacy tends to be. It’s never a one attempt and done. We will continue to consult and adjust our advocacy plan accordingly.

Here are some comments that people have been willing to share with us to reflect on.

******

“Details such as grade, or “unmet accommodations”, even without names, might subtly identify a child in smaller settings, inviting unintended exposure or stigma. Tracking “how often” a crisis occurs can subtly risk shift focus to struggles over strengths, potentially leaving families feeling vulnerable if privacy safeguards aren’t fully robust (like encrypted, consent-first platforms, private, insured secured hosting protecting Privacy Information and vulnerable persons), I make no assumptions of whether thec later is in tact or not, simply spotlight.”

“This tracker has enough gaps in it that could cause harm as it stands.”

“When room clears are tracked publicly (even aggregated), they could highlight a school’s “challenges” in reports or media. This might unintentionally label learning environments as “unsafe” or “disruptive,” prompting administrators to suggest alternatives like specialized programs, online learning, or even withdrawal from the public system (also known as exclusion). Families may feel forced out, seeking solace elsewhere to avoid the cycle of exposure and stigma. In BC, we’ve seen enrollment shifts in inclusive classrooms, many tied to crisis data (information released from Ministry or media for example), a quiet exodus that widens inequities, as public systems lose diverse voices and funding follows.”

“There could be risk of resource misallocation without fullesome context. The tracker spotlights shortages (e.g., low staffing), but if data focuses mainly on incidents, it could unintentionally ignite a steer of funds toward reactive measures like more security or isolation protocols rather than preventive, affirming ones. Without balanced insights (e.g., “What prevented a clear today?”), risks could grow for mismatched supports, where students bear the brunt through increased removals or segregated placements.” – Suzanne Perreault

******

“The tracker invites teachers, education assistants and others to enter information about classroom “room clears.” Even if no names are used, the combination of school, grade, and date can make individual students identifiable, particularly those with complex or behavioural disabilities. In some contexts, this may involve identifying or aggregating data about Indigenous and disabled students.” 

“Because room clears disproportionately affect Indigenous and disabled students, the tracker also raises serious human rights and reconciliation implications.” 

“Collecting classroom-level data outside the protections of the School Act, FIPPA, the Accessible BC Act, and DRIPA/UNDRIP may bypass required safeguards for privacy, Indigenous data sovereignty, and disability rights. The Surrey DPAC may legally operate under Board recognition and district infrastructure, not as an independent research body, so the Board seems to remain responsible for ensuring any data activity complies with law, rights and ethics.” – Andréa Coutu (Co-founding member of the original BCEdAccess taskforce and co-editor of the first exclusion tracker report)

*******

“I am a parent of AuDHD PDAers who are not attending brick and mortar precisely because staff lack the skills to support complex kids.

One of my kids never spent more than two hours at school when we were attending, because staff didn’t know how to support him, even when I provided plenty of information and resources on how to do so.

Had I been pushing for full days, there is no doubt in my mind that a room would have needed to be cleared at some point due my kid’s hypersensitive threat response and the propensity for staff to trigger him by raising their voices and getting in his face despite being asked not to do things like this.

I continue to face public judgement and shame due to the nature of my child’s nervous system disability. We live in an ableist and behaviourist world that does not understand him and is reluctant to accommodate him.

There is no doubt in my mind that the kids who are triggering room-clearing incidents are experiencing extreme stress in the classroom, in large part due to the ableism and behaviourism they experience in that environment.

Data like this will then be used to further justify their exclusion, and marginalized families will have even less recourse than we already do.” – Anonymous Parent

********

“Those impacted can easily identify when a room is cleared but much less identify what led up to it. As well, many involved don’t even know what triggered the incident until someone more informed and engaged can deconstruct events leading up to the room clearing. We are both trying to identify, learn, inform, educate, and address the problem.

That’s a lot of aspects we need to understand in order to address to eliminate the problem.” – Anonymous Parent

*******

“This tracker was created by parents, teachers, and other school staff out of desperation for improved working conditions in our school where resources are scarce. However, those creating this tracker have either chosen to or are incapable of seeing the student voice in these situations and this tracker will ultimately result in harm and more exclusions. 

Tracking hazardous situations in our schools is the duty of the school district as an employer under WorkSafe BC, and as such we would expect that school districts are internally tracking situations where individuals may be at risk of harm (e.g. room clears, children eloping, excessive emotional stress, etc.). It is also the duty of employees under WorkSafe to report hazardous situations to their employer. And ultimately, it is the duty of the employer to fix problems reported by workers. Once identified, these situations should be investigated to determine the root-cause of the hazard. Was there enough support staff? Was there an IEP in place and was it being followed? Were trauma-informed practices in place? Have administrative procedures for these types of situations been updated recently with the latest information on trauma-informed practices? These all need to be addressed in the proper manner, and with proper resources and staff available to make our schools both safe and inclusive. These two things are not mutually exclusive.

Excluding students in 2025 is no longer an option and student safety is the responsibility of everyone working together in a culture of health and safety where honest conversations are occurring, safety concerns are being addressed, and adequate resources are available.” – Anonymous Parent

*******

We will be sending this blog with testimonies, as we have with other blogs, to the BC Human Rights Commissioner to share with them our members’ lived experiences and wisdom. If you and your children are being negatively impacted by the lack of resources in education, we encourage you to send them an email and share your experience.