Special Ed Teacher Comments on Changes Being Pushed by DOE: It's not About Children

[proud2BlibKansan]

You always hear ed deformers say they are about children and accuse the Real Reformers about being about adults. Here a spec ed teacher shows what changes by the DOE are really all about.

Say a zoned school has 8 kids that need 12:1:1 on a given three grade section... how will the school fund the 12:1:1? I very much believe the DOE would want the IEPS changed to "a least restrictive environment" (which is their code for make the kid fit the program not make a program for the kid)... which they are already doing in charter schools. The charter in our building has counseled several families out of special education services, and there have been a few where it was VERY damaging to the child, and they were boomeranged back to their PS (mostly told their child wasn't a "fit" for the school) in even more dire circumstances. The potential for the removing of student services and the usurping (and manipulation) of parents and their rights is truly troubling.

I do not believe one word the DOE says regarding their reforms for special education. I fully believe this policy is about dollars, about increasing student to teacher ratios, about taking services away from special needs students b/c they are "too costly" and it is a "waste of money" to fund programs for "kids who will always be behind anyway". The fact that the DOE could not complete one comprehendible sentence on this very important issue, regarding an initiative that is already underway, proves I/We have EVERY reason to be suspect... and must be vigilant! (and btw, not just for our special education population, which should be enough, but for our general ed population as well... they too will be impacted by potentially increased class sizes filled with more high needs students who are not getting the support they need... both groups will suffer.)

My mom's boss (a physician) is always my bell weather in terms of what this administration is really thinking but won't say. When I started teaching children with mental retardation and other health impairments, his response was, "Why bother? You are wasting your time, it doesn't matter what you do with those kids." Disgusting and sad.... but there are MANY people who feel this way, and in a time of supposed economic crisis, in a time when the top 1% are scrambling to protect their disproportionate distribution of wealth, the most vulnerable in our capitalist society will be the ones to pay the price.

http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2010/09/special-ed-teacher-comments-on-changes.html

[xchrom]

1. Recommend

[msongs]

2. our local district is taking SH classes with 9 and cramming kids into ones with 18...

SH = severely handicapped. so they are shifting from education services to day care basically and resisting moving any kids to a less restrictive environment that they are capable of handling. too much work and expense ya know.

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. They are placing kids who used to be placed in state schools into regular schools

It's shameful. And it's strictly about saving $$$, not about what is best for kids.

[jaxx]

4. Are you talking about mainstreaming the DD kids?

Most state schools are now closed because it was so restrictive. I'm interested in your ideas on this because I have a DD niece and work with the DD.

[proud2BlibKansan]

5. All sped kids in traditional schools are mainstreamed

Some for only an hour a day. But they are ALL mainstreamed.

Not sure what they do about mainstreaming in the state schools. We still have them here but are sending fewer kids to those schools. It's pretty hard to get a kid placed there.

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. We've actually gone from one extreme to the other

We used to place too many kids for too much time in sped. Now we place too few for too little time. And teacher/student ratios have gone up pretty dramatically.

I also think there is a need for state schools for some kids and the level of services they need. We just need to be more child centered when we make placement recommendations.

[jaxx]

7. I agree that all day mainstreaming isn't productive for some of the kids.

But the social aspect is good, they are more apt to bring a good vibe to the classroom than not. And as we all know there are so many levels of DD that the label stops some from achieving more. It's so wrong to mix physical disability with mental disability to label the DD with a score. Jeez that makes me so mad.

[proud2BlibKansan]

8. Oh I agree

I have spent my years in sped in a public school. We now have kids with feeding tubes and wearing diapers in regular classrooms. The problem is they have not increased the level of support for these children. A few get a personal nurse. But most do not. One school nurse (and many districts have several schools sharing one nurse, thanks to budget cuts) cannot meet the health needs of 500 or 600 kids, plus kids with diapers and feeding tubes. And some of these kids are physically handicapped in older buildings without good access from one floor to the next. One year they sent a kid in a wheelchair with no para. She was assigned to a class of students who had no physical impairments. How was one teacher supposed to walk kids from place to place in the building while also escorting the child in the wheelchair in the elevator?

Just crazy stuff like this.

Yes we need to put kids in the least restrictive environment and physically impaired kids belong in regular classrooms when they have no cognitive impairments. But they need support and accessible buildings.

[jaxx]

9. And I agree with you too.

We are seeing more and more DD kids with the diapers and the feeding tubes, and they do require a great deal of care...and on a regular basis. No teacher can be a nurse to one and try to teach everyone, when the one is so in need of 1:1 care. Teachers aides are the first thing to be cut and they are sorely needed in every classroom. You'd think by now the states would catch up to what they legislated concerning the DD population.

It's a huge problem (that's not a good word, but it tells that staffing has to grow along with the care needed) as the kids age out and are put into facilities for adult care for the rest of their lives.
Skills not used are soon lost, and that negates the very reason for school. It's a mess sometimes.

[proud2BlibKansan]

10. We have too many Educating Peter fans

I loved that documentary and think it served a great purpose at the time. Yes, mild and moderately impaired kids can indeed thrive in a general education setting. But we can't stamp all kids with disabilities as just like Peter. We've somehow lost our goal of INDIVIDUALIZED education.

[Jefferson23]

11. I absolutely agree with this, the LRE is the excuse, an abused use

of application.

For me this only brings back another huge disappointment from Obama. There is no damn good reason why
many services are not covered under health insurance.

The public option would have made a huge difference for millions of children. Although there are services
now for many through state and some fed money, it is no where near enough. Intensive early intervention
in the long run is cost effective too.

For the most part, the whole thing is a freaking mess.

On edit for clarity.

[LWolf]

12. I know I don't have to explain to you how infuriating this is.

:grr: