Posts Tagged ‘Special Education’

Opting Out

Thursday, February 18th, 2010

I went to an informational meeting for the parents of incoming special ed kindergartners and was struck by:

  • the increased enrollment (max 30) we are guaranteed to see in the general ed classroom, and
  • the emphasis on the state standards to which the state and district will hold our children

The thought of my already anxious boy taking inappropriate and stressful state tests is more than I can stomach, so I have done a little research and found the following item in a state testing FAQ.

Can the IEP team exempt my child from participating in state or districtwide assessments?
No. The role of the IEP team is to determine how your child can participate most appropriately in the assessments. Currently, California Education Code allows parents/guardians to submit a written request to the principal of the child’s school if they do not want their child to take any or all parts of the STAR tests. Parents of children with disabilities must follow the regular school process to exercise this option. Parents cannot exempt their child from the CAHSEE. However, there are potentially significant consequences for your child’s school if a large number of students do not participate in the assessments. You should fully discuss the accommodations and/or modifications to enable your child to participate with the other members of the IEP team.
What these “consequences” may be are of no concern to me and shouldn’t be to any parent.  What I can say as a resource specialist teacher who has had the unfortunate duty of administering inappropriate state tests to special ed students is that  for many if not most of them it has been an excruciating experience.

Will my son be taking state tests when he reaches second grade? Yes if he can absolutely handle them; no if he cannot.

Podcast 31: Day 35 of School

Sunday, November 1st, 2009

Talk to You Later-Notes to My Son: Day 35 of School

The Sorrows of Miss X

Sunday, October 4th, 2009

Some teachers seem to have all the luck. Like Miss X. She has three autistic kids in her class. An accident? I couldn’t really say. Maybe the administration thinks she has a good touch with these kids. She does. Even though she has very little support to see to their needs (and they have many despite their myriad talents), she gives them all she’s got. She’s a very accepting woman and a great teacher. So wouldn’t it be a little unfair to tie her performance as a teacher to the standardized test scores of her students when a big percentage of them are in special ed? Wouldn’t it put her at a disadvantage and teachers who are not as inclusive, who do their best to get rid of special ed kids, at an advantage?

But why does Miss X have so many autistic students? Three’s a lot even by today’s standards. Back when I started teaching autistic kids were exotic. You’d only see them in special classes and in special schools. The first autistic child I worked with was in a special class I taught over the summer. He had long blond hair and liked to spit in his hand. He could keep a tissue afloat by blowing underneath it, and when put in front of my Smith Corona electric typewriter, would type the names of the major credit car companies over and over. I would talk a lot to the boy and though he couldn’t respond verbally we developed a relationship that was strong enough that his father, a single dad, sought me out during the school year for advice. “What can I do to help my son?” he asked me. I didn’t know how to respond.

I still don’t. And now there are more and more autistic students, and they’re not just in special classes; they’re in the general ed class with Miss X. Witnessing my own autistic son in the hands of his truly gifted therapists has helped me to better understand my ASD students, but I still need to learn much, much more. And now that education is under siege (from budget cuts and charter privateers) public schools aren’t the best place for learning. Some even think the help I give my disabled students is part of a pact I’ve signed with the devil to defraud the honest taxpayer in order to make the school districts rich with money earmarked for special ed. Kids with learning disabilities are the most over-identified, these folks claim, but don’t worry; guaranteed they’ll go after autistic kids too. Why are there three autistic kids in Miss X’s class? Because under the pressure of teachers and parents, they are getting over-identified too.

Watch and see if this recent article in the NYT doesn’t give them fodder. It examines what they used to call herd mentality, monkey see monkey do. Why are overweight people overweight? Because an over-eating friend of an over-eating friend has fallen off the Weight Watcher wagon, tipping over the first domino that will make a whole social network overweight. Why are parent’s freaking out about the illegal peanut traffic in schools?

They (the authors) even argue — and this is sure to generate controversy — that the obsessive drive to create “nut free” environments is not the result of any real increase in children’s allergies but rather something akin to an epidemic of adult hysteria, spread via network transmission.

Well if you think those peanut- hating parents are bad, the argument might go, take a look at their autism-loving brethren.  Why are there so many autistic kids at school? Their parents are hysterical, that’s why.  And worst of all, their craziness is spreading.

Yes, I can hear it now: vaccination doesn’t cause autism.  Facebook does.

I guess all you can do is hunker down.  And hope Miss X doesn’t get laid off.

I’ll Take Manhattan (Part 3)

Monday, September 14th, 2009

One thing about BS: it makes great leftovers.

Schools have discovered that they can get extra funding from state and federal ‎governments for small-group instruction to help lagging students catch up if they say that ‎the students are struggling because of a processing problem in their brains. School officials who admit that the students are lagging because of poor previous instruction or a difficult ‎home life, by contrast, are left to pay the costs of small-group instruction entirely out of ‎their own budget. ‎

So says Jay P. Green, co-author of  “How Special Ed Vouchers Keep Kids From Being Mislabeled as Disabled” in his equally misinformed follow-up“The Problems with Special Ed”. The problem with both articles, as any special ed teacher will tell you, is that in the real world you don’t get points for identifying kids; you get penalized come high-stakes testing time because special needs kids drag down your scores.  Want to have Arne Duncan lower the boom on your school, fire your entire staff and/or turn you into a charter? Get crappy scores on your standardized test.  Want crappy scores? Label so many of your students Specific Learning Disabled that your special ed population becomes a significant sub-group and therefore subject to even more ridiculous demands.  Green Dot will be beating down your door.

And by the way, assuming a school district can get it together enough to perpetrate such a conspiracy is a bit of a stretch.  LAUSD is so messed up it’s selling itself to the highest low-bidder.

So you can save that Big Mac for lunch tomorrow, but it was junk when you bought it and it will be junk when you warm it up.

The Point of No Return

Wednesday, August 12th, 2009

I will fall over dead if districts that opt to cut local special ed funding while receiving stimulus money return to former levels once stimulus dollars run out. Under stimulus rules any district that receives money from the bailout can cut local special ed spending in half. Once stimulus money runs out the districts are supposed to return local spending to pre-stimulus levels. Will they do this? As this Freep.com article points out:

The answer… will vary by district. Some — such as those experiencing enrollment declines — are in a position that will allow them to cut local spending without affecting their special-education programs.

But for other districts, going back to the pre-stimulus level of local spending will be necessary. Special education is a federally mandated program with strict federal and state regulations that affect how much schools can cut programs.

But such “federally mandated programs” have many service options, each with a different price tag. I don’t know which shell game the districts will play but can easily imagine the following: Little Autie receives a pre-stimulus services from a one-on-one aide. The district convinces parents that  Autie doesn’t need the aide because he doesn’t stab himself with pencils anymore. All he needs, they claim, is a special ed teacher to consult with the teacher in his general ed class. Stimulus dollars flow in and local funding is slashed by 50%. In two years the district runs out of federal money and Autie starts stabbing himself again.  But now guess what? The funding for the one-on-one doesn’t exist anymore. Not only districts that experience enrollment decline but those that switch kids to cheaper service models will be allowed to cut local special ed funding, and that is a very scary idea. Good luck to the rightfully worried Detroit parents mentioned here. They realize what all of us should: that we are at the point of no return.

Are You Ready, Charterteers!

Wednesday, June 24th, 2009

Read today in the LAT’s coverage of charter Locke High School that the special ed classes aren’t so hot. Good thing next year Locke operator Green Dot will be taking them over too. I’m sure the school will use state special ed funds wisely. Don’t want to have the same problems they’re experiencing in PA. Wouldn’t like to see special needs kids like my son not getting what they need because someone’s cooking the books:

Special education for charters is funded in a different way than for school districts. School districts pay a sizable portion of special-education expenses on their own. They get a state subsidy, calculated using overall student enrollment and adjusted for wealth. Typically, school districts spend more on special education than they receive in subsidies from the state.

Charters get a per-child payment for their special-education students based on the special-education costs of the districts where the children live.

(PA Governor) Rendell’s proposal addresses a funding quirk that state officials believe costs local school districts money while benefiting charter schools.

Local school districts by law provide a full array of special-education services, from those for mildly disabled students with reading problems to those for children with severe cognitive problems and autism. The most severely disabled are sent to special schools.

Many charters end up with special-education students who are less severely disabled than those in most school districts.

In those cases, where relatively high-cost school districts are funding typically lower-cost charter school special-education students, the possibility of subsidy windfalls exist.

What the Zell?

Sunday, May 31st, 2009

Okay, just trying to figure out why the LA Times needs to bash public schools. Here’s what Muckety comes up with (click on the boxes):


Helen, wife of Sam Zell, LA Times owner, is what we call a Chicago venture philanthropist. According to Mike Klonsky:

This collection of equity-fund millionaires, corporate lobbyists and downtown real estate developers, each have their favorite charter schools or vertically-integrated programs that they contribute to.

Could it be that Helen is taking her show on the road?  The LA Times seems to be eager to help with this piece that extolls the virtues of the American Indian Public Charter without checking the facts (props to Oakland’s Perimeter Primate for her hard work):

By the way, when the figures of his three American Indian Model schools are combined, their average enrollment of students w/disabilities was 1.3% in 2007-08. The district average was 10%. Their combined enrollment of English Learners in was 3% in 2007-08. The district average for that subgroup was 30%.

Guessing the Zells wouldn’t care if my autie son got the boot at such an esteemed institution.  Don’t want anything to interfere with the self-congratulatory yacht club patter, especially the facts.

Read This

Saturday, May 9th, 2009

…for one reason charters seem to perform so well: they turn away kids with special needs.  Like this one (Recovery School District) in New Orleans. (Props to blogger Caroline Grannan and to The NewsHour [mainstream media no less!] for bringing it to light.)

A question of exclusion

JOHN MERROW: District-wide data indicate that (Paul) Vallas (Superintendent of the Recovery School District) has a problem. The average special education population in traditional schools is 12 percent, but at charter schools, it’s less than 8 percent.

Are your charter schools somehow excluding special needs kids?

PAUL VALLAS: No. No, not at all. Charters are generally much smaller than regular, traditionally run schools. You know, so charters may not have the capacity to have the various special education specialties like the speech therapists, et cetera. A parent’s going to ask, “Do you have these services?” And if a charter doesn’t have those services, the parent’s going to look for another school.

KARRAN HARPER ROYAL, Parent Advocate: That’s discrimination. That’s discrimination. You can dress it up however you like to, but it’s really discrimination.

JOHN MERROW: Parent advocate Karran Harper Royal has a child with special needs attending a New Orleans public school. She says Vallas needs to slow down.

KARRAN HARPER ROYAL: He needs to appoint a staff person or a few staff people who review the admissions of these charter schools, because clearly something is going wrong here. I want to see objective evaluation of the charters we have before we move forward with trying to charter everything.

JOHN MERROW: Aren’t you asking an awful lot? This is early in the game.

KARRAN HARPER ROYAL: I’m not asking an awful lot; we’re talking about our children. I have a child in this system. Why would I want less from a charter board than I would expect from a school board?

JOHN MERROW: While Vallas admits to no wrongdoing, he promises to hold charters accountable.

PAUL VALLAS: As more of our schools convert to charters and as more of our schools are granted charter-like independence, we’re going to be doing more policing, we’re going to focus more on accountability. If you are deliberating discouraging people or turning people away, that would be breach of contract. You can lose your charter.

JOHN MERROW: Nationwide, the percentage of charter schools is about 5 percent, a far cry from Vallas’ 54 percent. In the coming years, both numbers are expected to grow substantially and, as they do, there’s sure to be more debate about their effectiveness, as well as calls for more regulation.

Maestro… A Little History, Please

Sunday, April 19th, 2009

800px-occupational_therapy_psychiatric_hospitaljpg

According to Margret A. Winzer’s fascinating book The History of Special Education, school districts, at the beginning of the 20th century,

under pressure to manage if not to educate increasing numbers of unruly, disabled, low-functioning, and immigrant children, could no longer ignore the needs of these pupils and were challenged to find solutions to their problems within the system. Teachers were generally unwilling to handle these students in regular classes, and officials, seeking to maintain order, discipline, and high standards in the schools, were adverse to placing them in regular classrooms. To satisfy the requirements of compulsory education laws and the wishes of the schools, school districts created the community equivalent of institutions—special segregated classes. Exceptional students were not isolated in institutions, but they were very much separated in special classes, which were given many different names: ungraded classes, opportunity classes, auxiliary classes, and classes for particular conditions. Problem children, thus removed from the mainstream, could not contaminate the learning of normal children or lower the standards of the school.

The fact that children, like my son, are being educated in public schools seems to say not so much that society wants to teach them but that it is forced to do so. So Columbia’s Gil Eyal can call for public debates all he wants. It doesn’t matter how willing we are to help autistic individuals “have a meaningful level of membership in society.” If we don’t help them, we are breaking the law.

CMA (California Modified Assessment)

Thursday, March 26th, 2009

Having first heard of the CMA (California Modified Assessment) test last year, I got a real taste for it today at a meeting for resource specialist teachers. Basically, it’s a test for kids with disabilities to be given in lieu of the CAT6/CST, those nightmare tests I’ve been torturing kids with for years. (Try giving state tests to kids who are two or three years behind without any real accommodations, ADHD and SLD kids who two days into the two weeks of testing are ready to jump out of their skin. No fun.) As I noted to a colleague “This test is revolutionary.” Imagine: a test that lets kids use calculators without penalizing them, that shortens comprehension passages without dumbing them down. A TEST THAT ACTUALLY LETS THE STUDENT SUCCEED. Of course, there are certain provisos, which I share below, but the idea that students may be getting testing relief soon is very encouraging. A teacher at the meeting who piloted the test last year sang its praises, the Johnson Baby Shampoo of state exams: “No more tears.” We were all getting pretty worked up when the presenter told us it was too late to give the test this year; it has to be specially ordered. She also reminded us that only 2% of the school can take it. But I say, Who cares! It’s a start. And if I had a school-aged child who had  struggled with state tests in the past I’d be banging on the principal’s door. This new exam? This CMA? This is the test I want my child to take:

Background

The CMA is a new grade-level assessment for students who have an individualized education program (IEP), are receiving grade-level instruction, and, even with interventions, will not achieve grade-level proficiency within the year covered by the student’s IEP. The purpose of the CMA tests is to allow students with disabilities greater access to demonstrate their achievement of the California content standards in English–language arts (ELA), mathematics, and science. Eligible students in grades four and seven also complete a writing assessment—the CMA for Writing—as a part of the CMA for ELA.

See the California Department of Education’s California Modified Assessment Web page for more information about the CMA.

Who Takes the CMA in 2009?

Students in grades three through eight may take one or more of the CMA tests if they:

  • Have an IEP that specifies that they take the CMA for one or more subject; and
  • Scored below basic or far below basic in a previous year on the CSTs for any subject and may have taken the CSTs with modifications (these students may take one or all of the grade-level CMA tests); and
  • Are not eligible to take the California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA).

Students shall not take the CMA if they:

  • Do not have an IEP; or
  • Are eligible to take the CAPA.