OSET 2024

The appellant appealed the school board's decision to promote her gifted child by only one grade instead of the requested two grades, arguing it constituted a placement decision.

The Ontario Special Education Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that grade promotion is not a 'placement decision' under the Education Act or Regulation 181/98.

As there was no dispute regarding the child's identification or special education placement, the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

The appellants appealed the school board's decision to promote their child to Grade 7, which required a move to a new school, seeking instead to have the child retained in Grade 6 at his current school.

The school board argued the tribunal lacked jurisdiction because the appellants had not exhausted their appeal rights to the Special Education Appeal Board (SEAB) and because the decision was not an identification or placement decision.

The tribunal found it could take jurisdiction despite the lack of a SEAB appeal because the school principal had provided incorrect information to the appellants.

However, the tribunal concluded it lacked jurisdiction over the appeal because promotion to a new grade and the physical location of a school are not 'placement' decisions within its statutory mandate.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant mother filed an appeal to the Ontario Special Education Tribunal regarding her child's special education placement.

The child's father, who held interim sole decision-making authority over education pursuant to a Superior Court order, had previously cancelled the prerequisite Special Education Appeal Board (SEAB) hearing.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, finding that the statutory prerequisite of exhausting all other avenues of appeal, specifically the SEAB process, had not been met.