It is difficult to find proof that handing over the heart of special education to non-profit and for-profit companies improves services for students with special needs. It’s unclear whether it saves money either. But school privatization involving special education appears to be on the rise.
First, district administrators complain there is little district funding and they need to cut programs. The next thing you know they are “partnering” and have contracted with an outside business to provide the same services, only of questionable quality, they refused to fund originally.
In 2012, Stephanie Simon wrote a Huffington Post article entitled, “Privatizing Public Schools: Big Firms Eyeing Profits From U.S. K-12 Market.” Scroll down to the section/subheading “Special Ed as a Growth Market.”
Another niche spotlighted at the private equity conference: special education.
Mark Claypool, president of Educational Services of America, told the crowd his company has enjoyed three straight years of 15 percent to 20 percent growth as more and more school districts have hired him to run their special-needs programs.
Autism in particular, he said, is a growth market, with school districts seeking better, cheaper ways to serve the growing number of students struggling with that disorder.
ESA, which is based in Nashville, Tennessee, now serves 12,000 students with learning disabilities or behavioral problems in 250 school districts nationwide.
Public schools have always privatized resources to a certain extent, like books and computers, but here’s the scary part:
Critics see the newest rush to private vendors as more worrisome because school districts are outsourcing not just supplies but the very core of education: the daily interaction between student and teacher, the presentation of new material, the quick checks to see which kids have risen to the challenge and which are hopelessly confused.
The National Education Association has spoken out against outsourcing in general. Many school administrators are uncomfortable privatizing basic services like school lunches and transportation. They realize this puts a strain on community and they may not have as much control over quality.
But there are many more concerns about outsourcing special education.
- How will this affect teaching credentials?
- Will they cut teacher positions?
- Is cheaper better?
- Just who will be teaching the students?
- What purpose do school administrators serve?
- What role does the school board play?
- How are these companies held accountable?
- Will services be better or worse?
- How do you insist on quality control?
- How will parents be involved?
- Will money really be saved?
- How will money be saved?
The answers to these questions are not clear. But look around. Are they privatizing special education where you live?
A year ago teacher-activist Katie Osgood questioned the privatization of special education services in Chicago. Not only are there worries about the kinds of services that will be offered students, but the school district looks at “children as liabilities.” It also destroys the bond between community members who interact and may be employed with the local schools.
This isn’t just happening in big cities either. In the Illinois school district called Harmony District # 175, they are considering whether to hand over self-contained classes in special education to a private residential school because of budget cuts.
Harmony will likely contract with Sequel Youth and Family Services for classroom space at an elementary school. Sequel is found in Idaho, Nevada, Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Maine, Oklahoma, and Tennessee. They primarily work with students with autism in residential facilities.
Now they will move into the public schools. It isn’t clear how this will save money.
Sequel might be a fine residential center, and perhaps it should be a part of the overall mental health continuum for children. But a takeover of public school special education raises troubling questions (see above).
It is especially serious when you consider the current rhetoric surrounding special education by the U.S. Department of Education.
Much has been written about the problems with outsourcing special education that should make taxpayers take notice. This isn’t just about special education. It is about taking what belongs to the public, public schools, and handing it over to private companies.
It is meant for others to make money on tax dollars meant for students. Will these groups do it better for less? That remains to be seen.
People who support “smaller government” probably are not aware that essential government functions, including intelligence gathering, have been outsourced to private companies. The quality is poor, and not only are there no savings, but the costs sky-rocket, lining the pockets of the insiders. Janine Wedel explains this with exhaustive documentation in her book Unaccountable: How Elite Power Brokers Corrupt our Finances, Freedom, and Security. There is little transparency, little oversight, and massive expense. The privatization of our public education system is an unforgivable assault on the most fundamental public good–the nurturing of the next generation. For people who know little to nothing about the diverse needs of the special ed population to think they can serve these children’s needs on the cheap by people without the necessary training and experience is unconscionable. I have read that ALEC-sponsored bills have passed in some states that provide “scholarships” for families with special needs students to attend private schools. When doing so, they must give up their protections of the IEP process that is still (as far as I know) provided for in federal LAW. Special needs students and their families have more than enough challenges to deal with. The public system should not renege on its legal and ethical responsibility to meet the children’s learning needs by pawning them off to the lowest bidder.
Excellent point about families being deceived into signing on to a scholarship, Sheila! It is privatization in the worst fashion! Thank you as always!