• Home
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact

Nancy Bailey's Education Website

Revive, Rally and Recover Public Schools

  • Activism
    • Anti-Charter Schools
    • Anti-Common Core State Standards
    • Anti-Corporatization of Schools
    • Anti-High-Stakes Testing
    • State Action Groups
    • School Buildings
  • School Curriculum
    • General Education
    • Educators
    • Parents
    • Reading
    • Writing
    • Math
    • Science
    • Social Studies
    • The Arts
    • Technology
    • Behavior
    • Diversity
    • English Language Learners
    • Special Education
      • Autism
      • Emotional and Behavioral Disabilities
      • Learning Disabilities
      • Developmental Disabilities
      • Gifted
      • Other
    • Early Childhood Education
    • Elementary School
    • Middle School
    • High School
    • Student Careers
  • Other Countries
    • England
    • Finland
    • Australia
    • New Zealand
    • Canada

14 Devious Claims to Destroy Special Education

April 21, 2017 By Nancy Bailey 2 Comments

Post Views: 1,105

Around the country, state education chiefs, local school superintendents, and school boards are eliminating special education services. There’s an effort to get rid of special education. Sometimes this is done through language that sounds appealing.

Who doesn’t want a quality education for all children? Why not declassify students? Do schools really need part-time resource classes for reading? These claims might sound acceptable but they almost always lead to budget cuts!

Here is what I am referring to. If I have left something out or you have a favorite claim that’s made to get rid of special education please let me know.

  1. “The bar is too low.” When the IEP is written carefully with feedback from parents and a variety of specialists the goals should be realistic and challenging. The bar should never be set too low if parents are involved in the decision-making and the IEP is written correctly.
  2. “We need an enrollment cap.” Caps on special education should be outlawed! Ask the Texas Education Agency how their cap on services is working out.
  3. “General education needs the money more than special education.” This has been a common claim from the beginning of IDEA (PL 94-142). It pits special education against general education.
  4. “Students deserve quality schooling.” This implies that special education, or any kind of individual assistance, lacks quality. It’s an attempt to convince parents that less individualized attention for students is best.
  5. “We need to consolidate classes and/or schools.” Combining classes or closing schools usually leads to overcrowding and students can get lost in the crowd. This is a privatization ploy.
  6. “We need to declassify children.” Certainly we need to work on dropping labels, but in this case it means losing services.
  7. “All children are gifted.” This is meant to get rid of gifted special education. It’s true that all children are unique and have strengths, and all students deserve a quality education. But students with I.Q.s off the high end of the chart usually need special education. They might depend on a different way of learning to stay in school.
  8. “Special education graduation rates are down.” Special education and graduation are  controversial and deserve serious debate and discussion. Using this as an excuse to ditch special education is unreasonable.
  9. “We need more and better data.” Why? What’s the purpose and who profits? Well-prepared teachers know what information they need. Such information  should be between those who work with the child and the parents. 
  10. “We spend too much money on special education.” Question this assumption especially in today’s climate.
  11. “Assistants and aides for special education are not necessary.” Teachers depend on special education assistants and aides to help classes run smoothly. Losing these roles hurt the teacher and the students. 
  12. “Speech and language teachers, counselors, occupational therapists, etc. are not necessary.” These are vitally important positions to support a good school special education program. Cutting those who work in these professional roles harms the basic intent of special education.
  13. “Students only need to work on the computer.” Technology can be helpful to students with special needs, but children need positive teacher and peer group relationships.
  14. “There aren’t enough school psychologists to do testing.” How many years has this been a problem? How many students sit on waiting lists today?

Special education became a reality because children learn differently and require individualized teacher instruction. It became law that they receive such services. There should be no turning back now and denying students their rights.

Filed Under: Featured Tagged With: Caps on special education, consolidating special education, declassifying special education students, gifted, quality schooling, special education

Comments

  1. Anita Royster says

    April 22, 2017 at 7:41 pm

    Thank you for writing this. There are so many children that need special education. I do not like how services are shrinking for students, except the most severely disabled. I agree that too many fall through the cracks. Services are even changing at the preschool level when the philosophy has been to get intervention started sooner to make a better impact. It is just not right.

    Reply
    • Nancy Bailey says

      April 23, 2017 at 6:19 am

      Thank you, Anita. You raise a great point.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

front cover

An education glossary with an attitude.

Buy Now

front cover

Do we really want an America where we no longer own our public schools?

Buy Now

front cover

This book says “no” to the reforms that fail, and challenges Americans to address the real student needs that will fix public schools and make America strong.

Buy Now

Follow me!

Enter your email address to subscribe to my blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Connect With Me!

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Nancy E. Bailey Follow

Author, Ph.D. Ed. Leadership and longtime teacher, Blogging for Kids, Teachers, Parents & Democratic Public Schools.

NancyEBailey1
Retweet on Twitter Nancy E. Bailey Retweeted
doctorsam7 Dr. Sam Bommarito @doctorsam7 ·
19h

Things to ponder about the current discussions around SOR. From ChatGPT @ChatwithGPT
https://nancyebailey.com/2023/03/19/what-does-chatgpt-say-about-the-science-of-reading-it-may-surprise-you/?fbclid=IwAR0Fhkczq46nJq8n5ob1q2xF5Q9aFc9ya04TEgYCaVTyEElEQg_UbWfoROY

Reply on Twitter 1637853806833590275 Retweet on Twitter 1637853806833590275 7 Like on Twitter 1637853806833590275 24 Twitter 1637853806833590275
Retweet on Twitter Nancy E. Bailey Retweeted
nancyebailey1 Nancy E. Bailey @nancyebailey1 ·
19 Mar

I asked ChatGPT "Is the 'science of reading' settled science that determines how reading should be taught?" Here's the response. https://nancyebailey.com/2023/03/19/what-does-chatgpt-say-about-the-science-of-reading-it-may-surprise-you/

Reply on Twitter 1637502147515351043 Retweet on Twitter 1637502147515351043 18 Like on Twitter 1637502147515351043 46 Twitter 1637502147515351043
Retweet on Twitter Nancy E. Bailey Retweeted
deguire_mike Mike DeGuire, Ph. D. @deguire_mike ·
12h

"The privatization movement has been strategically designed...by billionaires and their fellow investors for specific purposes: to lower their own tax burden, and ideologically to dismantle public education." @NPEaction @NancyEBailey1 @TheAndySpears
https://medium.com/@jfiske80/billionaires-and-their-investors-are-impacting-education-policies-in-colorado-and-especially-in-c523579674af

Reply on Twitter 1637957759751831558 Retweet on Twitter 1637957759751831558 9 Like on Twitter 1637957759751831558 9 Twitter 1637957759751831558
Retweet on Twitter Nancy E. Bailey Retweeted
nepctweet NEPC @nepctweet ·
18h

"Let’s honor our students by providing them free quality democratic public schools that reject no one." @NancyEBailey1 https://bit.ly/3FE0KFA

Reply on Twitter 1637870110840094721 Retweet on Twitter 1637870110840094721 3 Like on Twitter 1637870110840094721 2 Twitter 1637870110840094721
Retweet on Twitter Nancy E. Bailey Retweeted
dianeravitch Diane Ravitch 🇺🇸🇺🇦🌈 @dianeravitch ·
18 Mar

Voucher schools don’t have to comply with IDEA for kids with disabilities. They are allowed to discriminate for any reason or none at all. #schoolschoose https://twitter.com/KatieLikesBikes/status/1636446553429647376

Katie 🌻 @KatieLikesBikes

@Forrest4Trees @GregAbbott_TX No one is reporting that private schools don't have to adhere to the Federal IDEA act. Kids with #disabilities will be further harmed because #publicschools provide important services to #PWD and are essentially having their budgets cut in half by the voucher system.

Reply on Twitter 1637123379458088962 Retweet on Twitter 1637123379458088962 64 Like on Twitter 1637123379458088962 178 Twitter 1637123379458088962
Load More

Archives

Tag Cloud

Arne Duncan Autism Betsy DeVos Bill Gates charter schools class size Common Core Common Core covid-19 disabilities dyslexia early childhood education Education Secretary Betsy DeVos Florida high-stakes testing kindergarten learning disabilities Online Learning parents Personalized Learning phonics preschool private schools privatization public schools reading recess retention School Choice school libraries School Privatization school reform schools Social Emotional Learning special education students Students with Disabilities Teacher Preparation teachers Teach for America teaching Technology testing the arts vouchers

Copyright © 2023 Nancy E. Bailey · Website powered by Standing Pine Media.