The moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; and those who are in shadows of life, the sick, the needy, and the handicapped.
—Hubert H. Humphrey
Every student achieving, everyone accountable.
—The Seattle Superintendent’s Office
You can’t put your guard down. Rest assured the wheels of ugly education reform continue to churn. Here is a recent Seattle Times headline, “Special Education is Ineffective and too Expensive, Report Says.”
Why? Well, students with special needs, 54 percent to be exact, aren’t managing to get their diplomas on time. They also aren’t going on to college as much as their non-disabled peers. They fail to always reach their NCLB goals on their IEPs. Students with emotional disabilities, I’m guessing with no real SPED services, are getting suspended 2 to 3 times more often than the students without disabilities. Second language students aren’t being served well, and parents have become concerned that their students won’t be employable.
I would argue that the reforms that have taken place since the reauthorizations that formed IDEA, along with NCLB and RTTT, have not been in the best interest of students with special needs across the country. The harsh budget cuts haven’t helped either.
But instead of fixing the problems in Seattle, and without reassessing the terrible reforms that have been foisted on schools and students with disabilities for the last 20 years or more, this is what the rubber stamped Blue Ribbon Commission Report from the Governor’s office, came up with:
The evidence is clear that disabilities do not cause disparate outcomes, but that the system itself perpetuates limitations in expectations and false belief systems about who children with disabilities can be and how much they can achieve in their lifetime.
“System,” of course, implies teachers. Hey, you teachers quit sitting around painting your nails and raise those expectations! And while you are at it—embrace Common Core! Why doesn’t the news say what they all really mean?
And this is how the Seattle Times puts it:
But the vast majority of children in special education do not have disabilities that prevent them from tackling the same rigorous academic subjects as general education students if they get the proper support, so those low numbers reflect shortcomings in the system, not the students.
And where does this all come from? What revolutionary research study have we missed? Arne Duncan and the U.S. Department of Education!
And parents who have students with disabilities—they haven’t forgotten you either. Also from the report:
We have experienced nearly 40 years of a special education system that is largely procedural, highly regulated, places parents in adversarial positions with the schools, and is more expensive than it needs to be — without achieving the positive outcomes that we desire for these students.
I don’t know about you, but I like procedural and highly regulated when it comes to public schools. That to me spells real accountability! It means they’re following the law.
I also like that parents can question what a school is doing with their child with disabilities and have their voices heard. As a teacher, I always understood the practice of openly tape recording parent meetings. This kept the special ed. team of professionals on their toes to do what was right for students–or at least listen. Such safeguards for parents should be sacrosanct. And if parents really disagree with teachers and schools, they should have access to mediation and an attorney. That’s how we ensure that students with special needs are best served.
But Seattle talks like it is getting rid of special education. They seem to believe the students with disabilities can be healed by the right kind of system. And their idea of a new system is driven by Common Core State Standards where everyone will be on the same page and perfect common learners in the end. Special ed. teachers know how unrealistic this is, and they know many children will fail. Then what? Yet, how do they raise such questions without sounding negative?
And that is not all. When huge controversial reforms take place in schools look for chaos in the real system. Special education administration in Seattle’s schools has been messed-up for a long time. They have had nine special ed. directors within five years—so many that teachers can never tell you the name of their director! And at a time when everyone is fearfully focused on data (I’d say rightly so), their data systems couldn’t even keep track of how many of their students with disabilities were actually in school!
They hired consultants, you can be sure of that in this age of privatization love. First there was The TIERS Group (Teams Intervening Early to Reach all Students) from LSU, who advertise “Implementing Performance-Based IEPs in a Common Core World (or More).” Is there more after Common Core?
TIERS subcontracted with Accelify Consulting, which doesn’t strike me as a kid-friendly program. Here is a clip from Accelify’s website to see what they are about:
Accelify provides K-12 data management systems that streamline district processes and deliver analytic tools to support better decision-making across all departments and levels of district administration. Our systems provide unprecedented visibility into district operations to create efficiencies in program management, ensure compliance, reduce program costs, and maximize federal funding through our proven Medicaid consulting practice. Accelify currently works with hundreds of districts in 16 states.
And when all this didn’t work, the Seattle School District hired the Seneca Family of Agencies, which seems more like a program for family services involving adoption, foster care and mental health services. It cost $421,000.
When you have these problems, it is easy to convince the public that special education isn’t working and it needs to go. Nobody wants to pay for incompetence. The state already froze three million in special ed. funding to Seattle. And Arne won’t have any of these shenanigans, or failure of students to be perfect learners who march in a straight line. You can’t say he didn’t warn us of this last June. So we all know what his next step will be. And it will happen in every school district in every state in the country. Watch for the damning of special ed. where you live. If it isn’t there already it’s coming.
What a plan! If I didn’t know better I’d say it had been contrived when special education first came about—when children were pulled out of despicable institutions and placed in real schools. There have always been cheap, greedy cynics who don’t want to fund special education.
Yet, despite them, many Americans have always believed in all their young people, that everyone can learn and grow and earn respect in a country and public school system that should open its doors to everyone.
The old special ed., despite its problems, accepted all children for who they were, and it worked from where they were at academically, creatively, and socially, realistically moving students forward. There was no attempt to work towards common, or have students reach the same goals. But they were high goals! And there were huge expectations!
Thankfully, I don’t think children will return to the institutions. Instead, we will have segregated charter schools with workers who place children on computer programs deemed to assist them with their challenges. That’s no good either, but, hopefully, families will strive for something better. Inclusion? It’s anybody’s guess if it will be done anywhere.
Right now, in Seattle, I don’t see anything meaningful and of substance about special ed. and children in all of this. We know children need more than this convoluted hype. I don’t see any concern for children at all.
To play on the words of Seattle’s favorite sitcom psychiatrist, Goodnight, Seattle. Special education has left the building.
holly says
I have worked in sped in Seattle for 18 years. Sped programs are woefully understaffed. It’s almost as if Seattle feels these kids aren’t worth the effort. I have seen profoundly autistic kids placed in regular classes when they just shouldn’t be there. No one should expect a profoundly disabled child to perform at the same level as their neuro-typical peers. It is unrealistic. Now with loosening pollution standards we can expect a huge onslaught of more special needs babies being born. Why is there a sharp rise in autism? No one seems concerned with finding the cause because they’re afraid of what they might find out and money is always more important than humanity. Instead of spending millions on consultants, they should be listening to the teachers. The money they spent there could have funded three more special education programs.
Nancy Bailey says
Thank you, Holly, for sharing your experience. It isn’t surprising though. What’s happening in Seattle is going on around the country. Cut services than blame the teachers. It is sad that teachers are not given the voice they deserve, and inclusion is used to push many students out of special education.
Lisa Vavrik says
I find this offensive after teaching special education for 11 years and having disabled children in my family. They have grown up and are productive citizens as many other special education students have done. I think our education leaders should spend a day with a child that has processing difficulty to see they are smart even if they look different on the high stakes test. I have worked with many types of disabilities and could never say I that I met one that I did not learn from myself. Education leaders need to be educated!!!
Jack Covey says
Here’s an exchange I had with a USDOE shill named “systems change consulting” defending Duncan’s disastrous new special ed. policy. This was on the Diane Ravitch blog’s COMMENTS Section last June at
http://dianeravitch.net/2014/06/25/peter-greene-is-this-the-stupidest-thing-ever-to-come-out-of-the-u-s-doe/
———————————-
Jack
June 25, 2014 at 12:31 pm
Also, according to your line of thinking—and that of the article you linked to—the problem with say… a quadriplegic lacking the ability to swim… is that no one ever held the quadriplegic to “high enough expectations”, or exposed him to “enough testing and accountability” that would measure and motivate him to swim.
Those fools who claim that his lack of swimming ability are because the nerves connecting his limbs to his spine and brain are severed…. well, they’re just engaging in the “soft bigotry of low expectations”, and of course, let’s not forget to condemn those “incompetent swimming teachers” who are actually one of the main obstacles to success in this case.
SOLUTION: “hold” that quadriplegic “accountable” and “test’ him in a way that “soft bigots” with their “low expectations” have so far stupidly refused to do….
throw him into the deep end of a swimming pool, and watch as the corporate reformers’ “high expectations” inspire him to do the backstroke.
—
systemschangeconsulting
June 25, 2014 at 2:03 pm
No, Jack, I would never suggest that a quadriplegic should be able to do things that s/he is physically incapable of doing. But I do believe that all children with learning disabilities should be able to read as well as their non-disabled peers if they are given the proper services and supports and so does the National Learning Disability Association.
—
Jack
June 25, 2014 at 9:54 pm
systemschangeconsulting: “But I do believe that all children with learning disabilities should be able to read as well as their non-disabled peers if they are given the proper services and supports and so does the National Learning Disability Association.”
———————————————
So you’re admitting the existence of “children with learning disabilities”?
Good, we agree on that. It sounded like you didn’t believe that they exist, and that so-called “special ed” kids were actually fully-functioning students being inaccurately categorized as “special ed,” and were merely victims of low expectations and an not enough testing—Duncan’s asinine analysis and prescription. (Oy vey!!!)
Now here’s where we differ.
You claim that, given enough services and supports, children with learning disabilities…
(and these are YOUR words)
“… all… should be… able to read as well as their non-disabled peers.”
No, no, no, no, and NO!!!
If, like myself and other teachers, you’d sat at a small table for weeks and weeks co-teaching a small class of kids with learning disabilities—kids who truly have a disability and not those full-functioning kids who were mis-diagnosed…
If you had ever done this, you’d see that there is a “ceiling”, or limit to how much they can improve their reading or math abilities—a “ceiling” that varies from child to child, but one that is below that of even the “lowest functioning” mainstream student with no diagnosed learning disabilities.
As with the hypothetical “quadriplegic” I wrote about earlier… no matter how much one-on-one attention, or private tutoring, or innovative whatever, these students won’t ever be able do everything that a child without learning disabilities can—such as read or calculate math… in particular AS FAST as a mainstream child… Certain of these kids often can read, but it takes them three, four, five times as long… the same with Math… and that’s as good as they’re going to get. These particular students won’t be able to handle complex, critical, analytical thinking. They NEVER will… and that’s just fine.
To insist and demand that kids who truly possess learning disabilities “just put their minds to and do it”—even with whatever supports and services—is not only a bad idea. It’s child abuse.
I remember my first experience with special ed. kids—a short-term assignment in a class where kids had mild-to-severe autism. No matter what the regular teacher and I did, the students just couldn’t do more than struggle to focus and then decode and read the simplest of sentences… and it was slow going at that with the student assigned to me at that point of the day.
Eventually, I became overcome with emotion, and left the room, going into a small store room with a window to the class. I turned my back, crouched down out of sight, and started weeping at the students’ plight. As quick as I could, I got myself together to return to working with my assigned student. I was hoping that no one saw me, but someone did.
The veteran special ed teacher, took me back in storage room and asked, “You were crying now, weren’t you?”
“Yeah… I just feel so bad for these kids… ”
Then she just let me have it—as well she should have. “Yeah, well, your maudlin acting out like that is of absolutely no use to my students. Neither they nor their parents want your pity, or anyone else’s pity. You’re now living in the world of ‘Why do they have to be this way?’ or ‘If only they weren’t like this, Boo-hoo, boo-hoo.’ Let me tell you. That is the absolute LAST thing that these children need. We can’t focus on what MIGHT have been, or what COULD have been, and the just wallow in that… We have to accept them AS THEY ARE, and then move forward from there, loving them and teaching them AS THEY ARE.
“Think if it this way, Jack. Just as with a mainstream child, there’s two states regarding their academic outcome— ‘where they ARE NOW’ and ‘where they CAN BE’ if we do everything possible so that they can maximize their abilities. Our goal, your goal, our students’ goals, their parents’ goals… is to close the gap between those two states as best we can… and yes, we have to make peace with the reality that, after they have maximized their abilities, they will never be on a par with their mainstream peers… and that’s okay, and that’s no reason go blubbering away in the closet. And you need to make peace with that reality, and make peace with that NOW! TODAY! And you have to do it before you go back to working with Benny… or I’m going to ask that you be assigned to another classroom. Got it?!”
“Got it.” This led to the several weeks I mentioned earlier—quite a learning experience, let me tell you.
That happened over a decade ago, and I remember that like it was yesterday. We later took the students out for a walk on the nearby and legendary Venice boardwalk. I remember seeing a regular local eccentric—a guy with a robe and turban—go past on roller skates, as he played an electric guitar. The kids were transfixed by him and the other Venice characters they saw, and this contributed to what turned out to an upbeat outing to Venice Beach.
We even went to lunch at a restaurant… on LAUSD’s dime… yeah, baby!
Nancy Bailey says
What a great description of working with students with disabilities! So many of the individuals who push for reforms have no idea what it is really like to work with kids. I do believe some might think they really are doing what is noble. But students with special needs grow and thrive at their own pace in most wonderful ways. Your writing is right on! And it is funny you mentioned the Venice Boardwalk. Recently, I visited CA and got to watch some of the same eccentric people there at that beach, so I can actually picture your experience! Thanks, Jack!
Michelle Skigen says
The flaw in the system is that placement is off social “feels’ more often than real potential, and that causes kids to shut down due to curriculum and environment that is either too stimulating or under-stimulating, not to mention staff attitudes. However, tossing out supports because of this is the most ridiculous thing I ever heard. If that were logical, then all hospitals should be closed and no medical care given because people sometimes die from staff error.
Nancy Bailey says
Thanks, Michelle. Excellent point!
Janna says
http://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2014/11/washington-disabilities-arent-real.html
Connie says
what the heck is the national learning disability association? If they truly do take the position that all learning disabled children should be able to read the same as their nondisabled peers, then they are a fraud. …..some sort of phony trade association set up with a name to sound official, but really created just to further somebody’s agenda. This simply defies common sense. Do they really think a child with a medically irreversible brain injury can read the same as a typical student just by forcing them to try harder and giving them more so-called support? These people are total idiots. The emotional damage that such an attitude will cause an already vulnerable child will be obscene.
Nancy Bailey says
These “make everyone normal” messages are difficult for teachers to argue against. Teachers sound like defeatists if they do speak out against them. And the leadership in many of these organizations have bought into the corporate idea of reform. Your point is well-taken, Connie. Thank you!
Cynewulf says
I wrote this as a comment on Diane Ravitch’s blog back in June:
“Let me start by saying that I am an ESE teacher. I teach students with learning disabilities and language impairments. The students I have are in the unit they are in because they are at least two grade levels below their regular ed peers in reading.
“Currently, in Florida, we already have to give these students access to the same standards that their on-grade level peers enjoy. That has been the case for years. We already know that Florida tests pretty much everyone, no matter their disability. Again, this has been the case for years. I can’t believe that in this education environment that there are many other states that are significantly different. And yet, Arne is going to say that these students aren’t getting a quality education? That they aren’t held to high expectations?
To me, it is pretty obvious that these students are held to much higher expectations than their regular ed peers. It would be like telling two mountain climbers that they have to reach the same peak, but one of them will do it with both hands tied behind his back. Sure, he can have some accommodations. Someone can hold his rope steady. Someone else can yell out supportive verbal encouragement. He can even take longer breaks, and we’ll take away any time requirement (as long as he finishes in the same day that he started).
“The world of special ed was already insane. I’m not sure where this takes us. As I said, in my class, the students are all at least two years behind in reading. What I didn’t tell you is that I teach in an elementary school. What this means is that many of these 3-5th graders are non-readers. The few that can decode are either doing so at a kindergarten/first grade level or at a level approaching grade level but without any comprehension whatsoever of what they have just decoded. Despite this, they have the same designation on paper (or computer) that other LD kids have who are just slightly behind their regular ed peers.
“In Florida, as I imagine is the case in other states, we already track academic progress. You might think it would be as easy as seeing what they are capable of doing at the beginning of the year and then comparing that with what they are capable of at the end of the year. Not so. Remember, they are working on the same standards as their regular ed peers. And, so, they are tested with the same tests that their regular ed peers take. This means that a fourth grader who cannot read anything above “see sam run” is being tested on those “rigorous” non-fiction passages that are on a fourth grade level (not the fourth grade level of yesteryear but the new, improved 6th grade, I mean 4th grade level of today). And then we track their progress on a graph. If you’re thinking that these graphs look like random peaks and valleys, you are correct. When you cannot read and you are given a test, you are just going to guess. Which is what these students do. Sadly, they have become so inured to this that they guess on the few items that they actually are capable of doing.
“The federal government is already involved through NCLB, etc. These students count towards AYP. They count towards the school’s “grade.” The schools have every reason to give these students everything they’ve got, so why aren’t the slackers doing anything to give them a “quality education”? Well, they are. Florida is an RtI state. To get an ESE label, a student has to show that they are “resistant to interventions.” That is, they have to show that they require extensive interventions, that if they are weaned off of the interventions, they regress. Or, they have to show that despite intensive, research-based interventions, they are still showing no progress. In other words, before these students come to me, they have already received every intervention imaginable. In addition, even after they are found eligible for ESE services, they are usually started in a less restrictive environment. If none of this has worked, why should it work when they get to my class? Indeed, it had to be shown that it did not work in order for them to get into my class in the first place.
“Alas, I’m afraid I do not have a magic wand or a bag of pixie dust with which to work miracles. So, what is an ESE teacher to do? Most of us actually work with the studennts where they are at. And we move them forward from there. There is no huge spurt of growth (very rarely anyway), but they do make academic gains. None of these gains will show up on the regular ed grade level assessments, but they are there nonetheless. We’ve often wondered why these students aren’t given meaningful assessments that will show growth and that will actually tell us where these students are still struggling (thanks, FCAT, I already knew they couldn’t read on grade level). Now we know why. It’s to show that these students aren’t getting a “quality education.”
“I would tell you that these students, who are as bright as you or me, struggle immensely with academic subjects. That they are usually Language Impaired as well. That most of them are also ESOL students. That most of them come from low SES homes. That most of them come from single-parent households. That many of these parents come in to thank us because their child used to hate school and now they want to go. That their regular ed teachers in the past told us that they wouldn’t do anything in class, that they would shut down when anything was required of them, and now they are working in class. That through a lot of hard work and effort of both the teachers and students, the students get to a point where they stop saying, “I can’t do this, I’m stupid.” That non-writers become independent writers (legible despite the many spelling, grammar, and convention errors). That non-readers become readers (yes, still way behind their regular ed peers) and learn to enjoy reading. I would tell you these things, but it doesn’t matter because none of it shows up on the tests. The tests show that these students are not making any gains. And, as we all know, there are no excuses.”
Nancy Bailey says
I used to teach in Florida, so I appreciate hearing this realistic description of what is happening there. You said:
“To me, it is pretty obvious that these students are held to much higher expectations than their regular ed peers. It would be like telling two mountain climbers that they have to reach the same peak, but one of them will do it with both hands tied behind his back. Sure, he can have some accommodations. Someone can hold his rope steady. Someone else can yell out supportive verbal encouragement. He can even take longer breaks, and we’ll take away any time requirement (as long as he finishes in the same day that he started).”
As difficult as this is to read altogether, this is especially moving, and I also sadly wonder how long you will be able to provide accommodations–esp. with testing.
Thank you so much for taking the time to comment.
Ramona H says
You wouldn’t write this unless you cared deeply about students, so thank you for that. But I think you have conflated several issues in a way that misrepresents the report in question.
“On Creation of a Special Education Task Force” (http://www.governor.wa.gov/oeo/reports/SpecialEdTaskForce%20Report_Nov2014.pdf) was initiated by the Washington State Legislature, at the behest of advocates in our state – primarily families of students with special needs. Its charge was simply to determine how best to set up a task force that, in turn, would address issues that children with special needs face in our K-12 schools.
The final report represents the work of 228 people/organizations– from all sorts of backgrounds and from across the state — and emphasizes the need to characterize students with disabilities first as general education students, and to work for successful outcomes such as increased graduation rates in a collaborative way.
Children with disabilities and special needs in Washington (like elsewhere) grapple with misunderstanding and assumptions about what they can and cannot learn. Equity and access to a general education curriculum that will prepare them for life after high school are huge concerns for families. As someone with your background understands, life in special education gets complicated. Unfortunately, K-12 policy discussions in my state have largely left the unique and diverse needs of these students unaddressed. And many people – other families, students, even educators — do not really understand the broad range of students that “special education” encompasses, or that learning differently, or requiring accommodations, does not mean they can’t learn.
The task force that this report is intended to help set up would be unprecedented for us here in Washington, and many are hopeful it will help us move beyond the adversity, misunderstanding and miscommunication that eats families up.
What this report is NOT about is Seattle, or its special education system. And it certainly is not about getting rid of special education services or insisting on a narrow definition of success.
As for the author of the report: Our state’s Office of the Education Ombudsman (http://www.governor.wa.gov/oeo/) is independent of the school system and is housed in the governor’s office. This is by design to help it mediate conflict between families and schools. The OEO has been a godsend to families here, helping them untangle complex issues, avoid costly litigation, and understand their rights and responsibilities. Many of the cases it takes on touch on problems with special education, ELL students, or kids in foster care, but it helps all students and their families navigate the public schools and is in a unique position to see how and where “the system” misfires, for instance with misuse of restraints and isolation, or overuse of exclusionary discipline.
The point of the report was not say that disabilities don’t exist or don’t affect learning, but that they don’t preclude successful outcomes. And yes, it also asserts “success” can include more kids graduating if we tackle some longstanding issues, including the tremendous prejudice many children with disabilities face.
Nancy Bailey says
You are right in that I may not have delineated the difference between the State report and Seattle’s difficulties in special ed.. I was referring to the Seattle Times article which loops Seattle with the State report as well.
However, the report is full of language that makes general education sound like it is the ONLY way that students with disabilities can improve. I think I speak for many parents who disagree with that conclusion.
Nancy Bailey says
Nancy Bailey says
Ramona,
I appreciate your sending your reply to my post. It is obvious we have different views on what the report says. My new post discusses some of the language in the report that is a concern. I would really appreciate if you would provide some feedback to those concerns if you have the time.
And this is supposed to be in response to your Trackback below.
Thanks!
Nancy
Ramona H says
Hi Nancy,
Fundamentally, this is about exploring universal design learning and adopting social emotional learning and behavior supports into the general education curriculum, so more children with special needs can access a basic education (a legal term in WA), and so our “general ed” system is better able to embrace and support all of its students.
It’s really about changing the way we do and view “general ed” and making it easier for all children to get the supports and interventions they need as they progress K-12. And not just to accommodate children with disabilities, but to better accommodate the diversity of all our students, including ELL, highly capable, “twice gifted,” struggling readers, etc.
To my mind It’s not so much about physical inclusion in the traditional sense — though many advocates definitely want more physical inclusion — it’s a much broader concept of a K-12 system that is flexible enough to embrace all students, even and especially those with special needs. Universal design is intriguing, and a commission could explore the feasibility of that approach, or some other, and then act as a resource for schools as they evolve.
And yes, it’s also a challenge to leaders in our state to revisit their notions of disability and their assumptions about what kids can and can’t do.
Finally, it is important to note the impetus behind this report and movement isn’t coming from vague “reformers.” This work comes directly from the advocacy of families. self-advocates and supporters of special needs students in WA. They want to rethink “general ed” to better accommodate all students. There are so many terribly sad stories about spec ed in our state. What we’re doing currently is not working — in some cases it does harm. The point of this report is that we need to let go of how we’re doing things, and move on to something better.
Nancy Bailey says
Many thanks to Diane Ravitch for re-posting my post!