Many parents have expressed concerns regarding the proposed reduction of special education teachers in certain high school inclusion classrooms. One of the proposed changes in the school budget would involve decreasing the presence of a special education teacher in the co-teaching Humanities and Science classes, from every day, to an every other day schedule. This change would cut the number of days a special education teacher would be present in these inclusion classrooms by 50%. Parents feared that the elimination of the SE teachers in these two core curriculum classes would signal the beginning of a drastic change in how Special Education services are delivered within our high schools.
At the recent CHSEPTA meeting, Dr. Campbell spoke about the considerations in budget reductions. He explained to parents that budget reductions would take place as far away from the classrooms as possible. I believe that Dr. Campbell was trying to be open and honest in his explanations, so I can only assume that he was provided with misinformation regarding this particular budget reduction. This proposed reduction will take place in classrooms and will directly impact the education that certain students receive, putting them at a distinct disadvantage.
This plan holds the potential of impacting high school special education students in a variety of negative ways. The mere fact that this change will be implemented in the 9th grade is problematic. Ninth grade is a critical year for students receiving special education services. Many of these students have difficulty adapting to change and let's face it -- High School changes everything! Course content is delivered at a much more rapid pace in high school than in middle school, which poses difficulty in adapting to this format.
These students are already starting with a disadvantage, based on their disability. To reduce the amount of time that a special education teacher is in their classroom, helping them to adapt and overcome challenges to this new learning environment, could set the stage for failure. The foundation for success in High School is set during the Freshmen year. It is imperative that these students have the special education teacher in their classroom to provide adaptations in learning materials and instruction in order to ensure their success. To have that foundation rocked by the elimination of a special education teacher, who often is the critical support person, does nothing to assist student progress -- it only sets the stage for poor performance.
Adapting to the rigors of a high school curriculum is a challenge for any student, but it is especially difficult for a student with special education needs. To now increase the level of difficulty by cutting in half the amount of time they have access to a special education teacher, is creating a gross inequity for these students.
The current arrangement of having the special education teacher in the co-teaching inclusion model during class time, allowed for a certain continuity that will be lost with this proposed reduction. The special education teacher is currently able to follow the lessons and progress of each of the students and make any necessary adaptations immediately. The oversight and guidance provided to students by this special education teacher was a critical element to their overall success.
Special education teachers are highly trained and qualified to work with special needs students. It is through the expertise, experience and extensive knowledge of a highly qualified special education teacher that these students make progress. These special education teachers can often predict potential problems in learning and make instant adaptations that enable a student to make measurable progress. To cut them out of the equation, 50% of the time, undermines their ability to work with this segment of our student population.
Decreasing the presence of special education teachers in Humanities and Science would indicate that the school district now considers these two core subjects to be of lesser value than Language Arts and Mathematics. All four subjects are part of our Core Curriculum and each should be given equal value.
This is coming at a time when a great emphasis has been placed on the importance of Science education. Secretary Arne Duncan of the US Department of Education recently stated that he wants to "launch a new era of science education in America." He said nothing about putting a certain segment of our population at a disadvantage in Science education. In fact to the contrary, Secretary Duncan stated, "The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act provides swift aid to states that they can use to avoid teacher layoffs and other education program cuts, modernize school buildings, and provide programs that protect the needs of special education and disadvantaged students."
In his recent speech regarding Science education, Secretary Duncan went on to say that "a nation that does not benchmark its standards against the highest international standards is crippling our children in the competition for jobs." Having a special education teacher present on a daily basis to ensure that our special needs students may fully learn the material should be of the utmost importance, as it is more in line with the direction of the US Department of Education.
It is not clear why a successful Special Education program in our high schools warrants being changed this year. The cost of two special education teachers at the high school level is less than 0.1% of the overall school budget – a minimal amount. The impact of the loss of these teachers will ultimately cost the district much more, since the result will be lower grade scores and a decrease in the number of students who score proficient on standardized tests. The consequence of this decline in academic performance will be a drop in state and federal funding to our school district.
According to Secretary Duncan "many of the stimulus dollars will go to Science education." He pointed out that "there is a pot of $650 million for education technology grants" and that "Title I, special education, and school improvement funding will find their way into science classrooms."
"There is also a $5 Billion Race to the Top fund, which will reward the school districts doing the most to advance reforms and that includes Science education," according to Secretary Duncan. If the Cherry Hill Public School District has such little regard for Science education and our Special Education population, they are destroying any hope of gaining access to a large funding source.
In conclusion, it appears that our school district is being penny-wise and pound foolish and it is all being done at the expense of our special needs population. Very sad indeed.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Reductions will Directly Impact Classrooms
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Mrs. Magge, I read this one to. If these children have learning problems why do you think we should spend big money on teaching them. Not to be insensitive but is your kid going to be a scientist some day?
This is the second time this anonymous reader has shown his/her ignorance. You speak boldly but hide underneath the anonymous identity. I try to give every human being the credit for having some level of intelligence, but unfortunately I cannot find that quality in you. You must have been blessed with all typical children. Maybe God will choose to educate you with a special needs grandchild. That would be the beginning of your education. I apologize to Kathi for using this column in this manner, but this writers ignorance got the best of me.
First, you ARE being "insensitive!"
Yes, as a matter of fact, my son will probably be a scientist one day, or possibly an inventor or maybe even president!
I do not like to brag, because I truly believe that all children bring something unique and special to our world. However, since you asked -- my son happens to be a genius. We are talking a card carrying member of MENSA! (no joke!)
He happens to have Asperger's Syndrome, which means along with his giftedness, he also has skill deficits. Those skill deficits can be remediated with an appropriate education that is well planned. Although I am not looking for a perfect education, I do insist on an appropriate one that follows the scope of the law.
This year my son is benefiting from a wonderful and talented special education teacher. You know why he is finally getting this instruction? Because I fought hard for it and paid dearly.
I do not fight this fight for my child -- I fight it for every one of our children. If your child had a need, regardless of school classification, I would gladly fight for him too. Our children are that important and a quality education is the best thing we can give them.
In terms of other children that have learning disabilities, they usually learn from differentiated instruction that a highly qualified special education teacher can provide. We actually have some of those teachers right here in our district. We need to better utilize this talent before we lose it.
Please do not judge these children or their parents until you have walked in their shoes. I forgive you for not understanding this topic better, but I also encourage you to learn more. These are your tax dollars too, and you should be aware of how they are misused.
For Anonymous above: Kathi's kid does have the potential to be a scientist some day and hi IQ probably far outweighs any of your children's! Sorry Kath, just felt the need to reply.
This is horrible. These teachers should not be cut. Mt. Misery should be cut. Late busses should be subscription service.
If you have detention, you get the late bus! PLEASE!
Another area for consideration should be AVID - while beneficial, it is way too expensive.
Kathi:
You have the biggest heart of any person I know. You stand up for these children and face opposition as a result, yet there you are still fighting for every child. Big or small, grade K or 12, typical or disabled, raised by good parents like yourself or ignoramo's like Anon #1 -- you advocate for them all and ask for nothing in return.
Don't let the ignorance of one distract you from your cause. People like that are only there to stop the momentum. It will backfire on them as goodness always prevails.
Thank you for pointing out the poor budgeting choices and the impact on students and teachers. It was very insightful. I hope the board of ed gained knowledge from this.
Diane Samuels,
Cherry Hill Resident and Registered Voter
The depth of your knowledge in this area is impressive. As a SPED teacher I can only agree with you that we are highly qualified to work with this segment of the student population. You raised very valid points and I have to agree that this "proposed" change would be a detriment to children with special needs and their teachers. Have parents addressed these matters directly with the school board? I have to assume that they are unaware of the implications of not providing appropriate support to students or the dollars available to support the initiative.
Kathi, thank ou so much for taking the time to write this and to continue to advocate for our children, even though this ma not even affect you directly only indirectly as a tax payer. And for the record Anon #1, Kathi's child as many other special needs students in our town DO have the potential of becoming scientists or other amazing professionals. Have you ever heard of Albert Einsten, Steven Spielberg, Temple Grandin or the inventor of MICROSOFT (the one that invented what most of us use everyday as a computer system - BILL GATES). All of these people and many more are known to have all or at least most of the traits included in the Autism Spectrum.
I am concerned about the way "inclusion" is tossed around in our district.
Inclusion is including an SE student in a mainstream classroom with whatever support the student requires.
We had a great co-teaching model that was specifically designed to address special education needs and provide the inclusive opportunities that these students required. The main beneficial element of the co-teaching model was that there is a regular ed teacher and a special ed teacher that worked together in the classroom. It was the balance created between the two teachers that provided for the success of the program.
If the humanities and science classes that you speak of here are co-teaching programs then they require both teachers. Anything less is just "inclusion" which is placing a student in mainstream.
Could it be that they do not understand the concept of these programs? They were established under a prior administration and board.
"Could it be that they do not understand the concept of these programs? They were established under a prior administration and board."
That is being kind and generous but the director of special services should know the programs and services available to the special education students. That is her job. She should also know how eliminating programs and support services will reduce the quality of their education.
School board may not be experts in special ed but they are relying on the special svc director to provide them with expert recommendations. Maybe she is the first elimination required. Did she get tenure yet? If not put someone qualified in the position.
I agree about SE Director. And what about Mr. Gallagher? He was here when Co teaching programs were established. He wiggles around the issues using different terms for the programs to confuse the public and the boe. Claiming ignorance when parents point it out is not being helpful it is being irresponsible.
know your job and do your job!
TO the 1st Anonymous,
Obviously, you're not a scientist. thank god for that. Mispelled the last name of Kathy twice in the blog. Are you just ignorance or stupid that can't even spell the name right twice?
I do not harbor the ill feelings towards the special education director that I have read in this blog previously, but everyone has their reasons for feeling a particular way about someone. I have had little contact with her, so I do not have the same "personal" perspective that many other parents do.
I tend to agree that she has made extremely poor desicions for educating our district's special education students. I do not believe that she has the knowledge required regarding specific disabilities and that leaves her vulnerable to making adjustments in programs and services that are ill conceived.
I think it is time to review our district's goals and future plans for special education and employee those that could lead us in the right direction.
The Board of Education has added an extra budget work session on Monday, March 30 to discuss the proposed 2009-2010 budget. The meeting will be held at the Malberg Administration Building and will begin at 7 pm.
It is imperative that we as parents and as community tax payers attend this meeting.
We have a very small window to convince the board and administration that business can not continue as usual.
Yes. Continue Late Bus Runs - as subscription services. If you use the late buses, you pay.
Yes. Continue Mt. Misery - but show me the money. Has TD Bank committed to next year?
Even if this is true. It is time to change the delivery of the program. It is too expensive at the cost of losing teachers at the high school level.
We must demand more of administration and the board to change their thinking.
Demand forward thinking in cost efficiencies.
Do we really need paper interim and report cards?
Do we really need to run late buses without some parental contribution?
Is it time to allow athletic and music sponsorship?
It is time for administration to stop dragging their feet and start offering curriculum that matches today and the future.
Computer Programming
Data Management
Social Networking - dos and dont's
Microsoft Certification
Personal Finance
Mt. Misery and Late Buses need to change the delivery. We can not allow this budget to pass with these programs staying the way they are.
We must change to go forward.
Our special ed delivery the high school level needs to improve not cut back.
What are people thinking? Late buses vs. special ed teachers?
Please go to this meeting Monday. Did you even know about it? What games are they playing now? Which heart strings is Campbell going to pull now?
Just for those who are not familiar with how much some people with learning disabilities can accomplish given the proper supports, mentors, etc., here are a couple of links.
http://www.grandin.com/professional.resume.html This is the professional resume of Temple Grandin. She has High Functioning Autism, although she functions at the Asperger's level. She admittedly received an extraordinary amount of help from understanding and supportive people in order to succeed as she did.
This is a link to her NPR interview with Terri Gross:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99009110&ps=cprs You can access audio of Temple Grandin's NPR interview. The 2nd half of this 38 1/2 minute interview is about autism but in the beginning, she talks about the link between animal behaviors and ASD behaviors and she goes back and forth. Roughly 24:30 is where the real autism discussion begins. She even comments about Einstein, mentioning that he would be labeled autistic according to the DSM-IV. She discusses sensory issues (incl. how debilitating they can be), social skills, etc. 35:40 - they discuss "geeks" and she mentions the concern she has about smart kids being held back & that the educational system doesn't know what to do with a "smart techie". She goes on from there to discuss how their minds work differently, etc.
Obviously everyone is different, and not all special needs kids in the district have an autism spectrum disorder, but there are a reported 1 in 150 with an ASD and that is even higher in NJ. Even on the spectrum, the needs of the individual vary greatly. There are also many people who need to be evaluated and are not being given the evaluations that they need. That was the case for my child until last year. He is finally getting the proper supports that he has needed all along (for years). He is now in an appropriate in-district school with a well-qualified, very knowledgable and incredibly gifted special education teacher, yet I truly feel that given the proper training (and understanding) of staff in his old school, he could have done well. Even within in the district, the ability of the different schools to provide the appropriate education for special needs children varies, and not all of them have teachers with the specific training necessary to accomodate the needs.
As to the question if we should "spend big money on teaching them", my parental and moral feelings aside, the law is very specific. The answer is a resounding "yes"! There are civil rights laws and IDEA law to protect these children and ensure a "fair and appropriate public education" in the "least restrictive environment" (whichever that may be, based upon the individual student's needs), but it should also be common sense. Properly educating the children, all children, according to their specific learning style, benefits everyone in the longrun. If someone is not given a proper education, where is that person going to be and what is he or she going to do as an adult? How likely is that person to need monetary supports to survive in the world? If it's a matter of proper educational programs, supports and mentors to help some of the children succeed and excel, and we might all benefit from some of their potential abilities, then why wouldn't you want to do all that you can do to properly educate them? The difference between a job packing groceries (no, I don't believe that there is anything wrong with that) and one in silicon valley or as a physician, researcher, physicist, teacher, engineer, designer of humane cattle chutes, or an artist, photographer, web designer, or whatever, may be a matter of those supports. They need not be that expensive either. Sometimes it takes creativity and insight, perhaps even from someone with who has lived with a learning disability and has succeeded. :-)
I don't agree with attacking the person who asked that question, even if it was very insensitive. Putting people down doesn't help anything. It just fuels ignorance. Sure, it makes people angry and, unfortunately, there are antagonists out there that do so because they think it's fun. We can and should inform, but IMO there's no need to attack back as there is no benefit to it.
Post a Comment