Judge chastises MO education agency, keeps charter school open - KCTV5
JEFFERSON CITY, MO (KCTV) -
A judge had strong words for Missouri's education agency in rejecting their move to close Gordon Parks Charter School.
The school's application met the state law and should be approved, Green ruled.
"Defendants' decision to deny the renewal of Gordon Parks' charter application was unlawful, unreasonable, arbitrary and involved an abuse of discretion," Green wrote. "The state board and DESE did not follow state law in reaching their conclusions."
The state must also pay the charter school's legal costs, which could be in the tens of thousands of dollars.
The judge's decision thrilled the charter school officials and its supporters. A representative for the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education said the agency was disappointed with the ruling.
This spring, the state board voted to close the school, which is located at 37th Street and Wyoming Avenue. Gordon Parks focuses on high-risk students and was specifically created to recruit, teach and serve high-risk students.
The school served students from kindergarten through fifth grade.
Enrollment for the fall began Tuesday after the judge's ruling was issued Monday. Classes will start Aug. 21. Because of the issues, Gordon Parks will resume serving just kindergartners, first-graders and second-graders. The hope is to eventually expand back to serving students up to fifth grade.
University of Central Missouri is the school's sponsor and had found the school in compliance with federal and state laws.
The university asked DESE in March to renew the charter.
"Unbeknownst to the University or Gordon Parks, DESE made the decision to deny the charter application well before it was even submitted," Green wrote. "DESE based this decision solely on partial MAP data."
State education leaders looked at state test scores. Students in certain grades starting at the third grade take the federally mandated tests known as "MAP."
"DESE compared the MAP scores of Gordon Parks ... to the MAP scores of the entire Kansas City Missouri School District, which included K-12 and also compared the data to the entire state, which included K-12. Because the MAP is only administered from the third grade up, the comparison DESE did was to compare grades 3-5 of Gordon Parks to grades 3-12 of the Kansas City Missouri District and grades 3-12 of the entire state," the judge wrote.
DESE had no data and couldn't determine the academic performance of the charter school's kindergartners, first-graders and second-graders. The state refused to look at data submitted by UCM about the performance of the students in the lower grades.
"Without elaborating on all of the facts, DESE essentially disregarded any information that did not support its premature decision to deny the application prior to its submission," Green wrote.
The judge detailed how state education commissioners in a meeting that wasn't properly noticed discussed the Gordon Parks situation with the state education commissioner on May 13. Green said "the facts are clear" that the meeting wasn't properly noticed.
The education commissioners and education agency leaders refused to allow the school or the university the opportunity to make their case.
"The board heard a one-sided presentation from DESE which used wrong, misleading and incomplete data,' Green wrote. He added that state officials did not undertake "a detailed or extensive evaluation" of Gordon Parks' data.
The judge said he was particularly troubled by the state's refusal to allow school and university officials to make their case or look at evidence that DESE had that supported renewal. The judge also criticized the state for making its decision before an application had even been submitted.
Another charter school that had similar problems was renewed, the judge said.
Those who supported Gordon Parks remaining opening issued a statement:
"In a victory for our children, Gordon Parks Elementary School has been saved, thanks to a Cole County Circuit Court judgment entered this morning renewing Gordon Parks' charter. This is welcome news for the Gordon Parks extended family of students, families, alumni, staff, volunteers and supporters. The Court's judgment means Gordon Parks Elementary School will be able to continue its mission by enrolling and educating students for kindergarten, first and second grade classes this fall. We will have more to say about that very soon. We will need all of the support we can muster to meet and improve upon our ambitious goals enabled by today's favorable court decision. Please stay tuned. Your support of Gordon Parks is deeply appreciated."
DESE officials issued a statement about their disappointment:
"We are disappointed in the ruling. The Missouri Constitution vests supervision of public instruction in the State Board of Education. Charter schools are public schools. The Department believes charter schools have a viable place in public education. However, they all need to be high quality schools. Irrespective of what other services they provide, their most important functions are teaching and learning and the success of the children they serve. We hold all schools in Missouri accountable to the same high standards."
My Son
Wednesday, July 31, 2013
Nixon: Tax cut bill would harm education, eliminate funding for new Fulton hospital | KBIA
Nixon: Tax cut bill would harm education, eliminate funding for new Fulton hospital | KBIA
With two stops in mid-Missouri Tuesday, Gov. Jay Nixon continued his campaign against a Republican-sponsored bill that would cut the corporate and individual income tax rates. Nixon vetoed the bill earlier this summer.
Nixon addressed Missouri school leaders in Columbia Tuesday at a conference hosted by the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. The governor used the venue to continue speaking against a bill that would cut taxes in the state.
Nixon said House Bill 253’s passage would result in cuts of roughly $260 million from funding for public K-12 education in Missouri. He said the state can’t afford to lose that funding. The governor recently vetoed House Bill 253 after it passed the state legislature, but Republicans may attempt to override that veto. For weeks, he’s also been drawing attention to part of the bill that would allow a sales tax exemption for prescription drugs to expire. Republicans in support of a veto override have said that part of the law could be fixed next year.
“To miss something the first time—everybody does that, Nixon said. “I mean, that happens to a lot of folks. But to come back and to vote to override with full intent that what you’re doing is raising taxes on seniors and folks who need prescription drugs, raising taxes on school kids and taking hundreds of millions of dollars out of our state budget—that is an irresponsible act.”
Missouri Budget Director Linda Luebbering said one provision of the bill, the federal Marketplace Fairness Act, is of particular concern to her. She said that provision could result in cuts up to 450 million dollars from education funding in Missouri by reducing the income tax rate by a half of a percent. Luebbering said if state lawmakers override the governor’s veto of the bill, it could impact Missouri’s credit rating.
“The three leading rating agencies just recently suggested that they are watching us closely because of House Bill 253 and the potential impact that that one provision could have on our revenue collections,” Luebbering said.
Later, speaking at Fulton State Hospital, Nixon says there would be no money for a new state mental health facility if lawmakers override his veto of tax cuts.
Nixon has frozen $13 million for planning and designing a new facility at Fulton State Hospital, the oldest public mental health facility west of the Mississippi River.
Nixon said the funds could begin flowing if the Legislature sustains his veto of the tax-cut bill.
Lawmakers could hold a special session in September to override Nixon’s veto of the bill. But on Tuesday, Republican house speaker Tim Jones told St. Louis Public Radio he likely would not bring House Bill 253 up for a veto override unless he was able to generate more support than the effort has now.
With two stops in mid-Missouri Tuesday, Gov. Jay Nixon continued his campaign against a Republican-sponsored bill that would cut the corporate and individual income tax rates. Nixon vetoed the bill earlier this summer.
Nixon addressed Missouri school leaders in Columbia Tuesday at a conference hosted by the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. The governor used the venue to continue speaking against a bill that would cut taxes in the state.
Nixon said House Bill 253’s passage would result in cuts of roughly $260 million from funding for public K-12 education in Missouri. He said the state can’t afford to lose that funding. The governor recently vetoed House Bill 253 after it passed the state legislature, but Republicans may attempt to override that veto. For weeks, he’s also been drawing attention to part of the bill that would allow a sales tax exemption for prescription drugs to expire. Republicans in support of a veto override have said that part of the law could be fixed next year.
“To miss something the first time—everybody does that, Nixon said. “I mean, that happens to a lot of folks. But to come back and to vote to override with full intent that what you’re doing is raising taxes on seniors and folks who need prescription drugs, raising taxes on school kids and taking hundreds of millions of dollars out of our state budget—that is an irresponsible act.”
Missouri Budget Director Linda Luebbering said one provision of the bill, the federal Marketplace Fairness Act, is of particular concern to her. She said that provision could result in cuts up to 450 million dollars from education funding in Missouri by reducing the income tax rate by a half of a percent. Luebbering said if state lawmakers override the governor’s veto of the bill, it could impact Missouri’s credit rating.
“The three leading rating agencies just recently suggested that they are watching us closely because of House Bill 253 and the potential impact that that one provision could have on our revenue collections,” Luebbering said.
Later, speaking at Fulton State Hospital, Nixon says there would be no money for a new state mental health facility if lawmakers override his veto of tax cuts.
Nixon has frozen $13 million for planning and designing a new facility at Fulton State Hospital, the oldest public mental health facility west of the Mississippi River.
Nixon said the funds could begin flowing if the Legislature sustains his veto of the tax-cut bill.
Lawmakers could hold a special session in September to override Nixon’s veto of the bill. But on Tuesday, Republican house speaker Tim Jones told St. Louis Public Radio he likely would not bring House Bill 253 up for a veto override unless he was able to generate more support than the effort has now.
Dexter Daily Statesman: Local News: Nixon says tax-cut bill will harm education funding (07/30/13)
Dexter Daily Statesman: Local News: Nixon says tax-cut bill will harm education funding (07/30/13)
NEW MADRID, Mo. -- Flanked by the state budget director and his top legal analyst, Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon spent over an hour Friday telling a large group of school administrators, teachers and community members why they should support his fight against a veto override of House Bill 253.
The governor had no shortage of strong words for supporters of the override, calling it "an unprecedented attack on public education" - the likes which he said he has not seen in his 27 years as an elected official.
House Bill 253 would create tax cuts for individuals and certain types of businesses, which the governor said will harm the state's ability to fund schools statewide. Supporters say the legislation offers a responsible way to lower taxes and that the cuts will stimulate the state's economy and draw new businesses. Whether the governor's veto should be overridden is among the most hotly debated issues in Missouri.
Nixon, some Democrats and Republicans in the state legislature, along with education groups and many school officials, sit on one side of the squabble. On the other side are leaders of the General Assembly and many of its members. Lobbying groups, including Grow Missouri, a coalition formed with the purpose of promoting a veto override of House Bill 253, have also launched large-scale campaigns.
The bill would phase in a 50 percent tax deduction for business income over the next five years, along with reducing the income tax rate by 0.5 percent for individuals and 3 percent for corporations over the next 10 years.
Republicans who wrote the bill say safeguards are in place so funding for public services and schools won't be at risk, such as deductions taking effect only if state revenues grow by at least $100 million. But the governor said he sees loopholes in the bill's language that would create large shortfalls in the budget.
"Special breaks for certain kinds of businesses are conveniently exempt from these so-called safeguards and would kick in immediately," Nixon said Friday.
Projections of school funding losses compiled by the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and released by Nixon's office show districts could lose up to $450 million this year if a veto override occurs and Congress passes the Marketplace Fairness Act, which would allow, although not require, states to collect taxes on online sales. Missouri also would have to use the new law for the cuts to education funding to be that large. Without the act passing, DESE estimates the cut to school districts would be $260 million if House Bill 253 goes into effect.
House Speaker Tim Jones last week called the projections and claims by Nixon "fear mongering" and that the governor only wants to "prevent tax relief."
Republicans also say they doubt the Marketplace Fairness Act will pass Congress, so it should be left out of the equation in claims it will bring cuts to funding for schools.
Grow Missouri says House Bill 253 will help the state's economy by lowering income taxes for the first time in 100 years and allow people who are delinquent on their taxes an opportunity to get back to compliance.
Missouri, according to the coalition, will lose businesses and income to neighboring states that have lowered income taxes because "income migrates to where it is treated the best."
The coalition represents business groups such as the Missouri Chamber of Commerce, the National Federation of Independent Businesses and the Associated Industries of Missouri. A major contributor to the coalition is billionaire Rex Sinquefield, who gave Grow Missouri $1.3 million to promote the veto override -- part of $2.4 million he has given to the groups pushing for it.
According to the figures from DESE released by Nixon, the 75 school districts which make up the state's Southeast Region would see a combined total loss of $22 million if the foundation formula for funding schools were reduced by $260 million this year, or $39 million if the formula were reduced by $450 million this year.
Republican members of the General Assembly also question why, if Nixon is so concerned about funding for schools, he decided to withhold $400 million from the state budget, including $66 million for K-12 schools.
The move, according to Nixon, is to partly to deal with the outcome he fears for House Bill 253. He told his audience Friday he is ready and willing to release the money for schools as soon as the Sept. 11 veto session has passed without an override of the bill.
NEW MADRID, Mo. -- Flanked by the state budget director and his top legal analyst, Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon spent over an hour Friday telling a large group of school administrators, teachers and community members why they should support his fight against a veto override of House Bill 253.
The governor had no shortage of strong words for supporters of the override, calling it "an unprecedented attack on public education" - the likes which he said he has not seen in his 27 years as an elected official.
House Bill 253 would create tax cuts for individuals and certain types of businesses, which the governor said will harm the state's ability to fund schools statewide. Supporters say the legislation offers a responsible way to lower taxes and that the cuts will stimulate the state's economy and draw new businesses. Whether the governor's veto should be overridden is among the most hotly debated issues in Missouri.
Nixon, some Democrats and Republicans in the state legislature, along with education groups and many school officials, sit on one side of the squabble. On the other side are leaders of the General Assembly and many of its members. Lobbying groups, including Grow Missouri, a coalition formed with the purpose of promoting a veto override of House Bill 253, have also launched large-scale campaigns.
The bill would phase in a 50 percent tax deduction for business income over the next five years, along with reducing the income tax rate by 0.5 percent for individuals and 3 percent for corporations over the next 10 years.
Republicans who wrote the bill say safeguards are in place so funding for public services and schools won't be at risk, such as deductions taking effect only if state revenues grow by at least $100 million. But the governor said he sees loopholes in the bill's language that would create large shortfalls in the budget.
"Special breaks for certain kinds of businesses are conveniently exempt from these so-called safeguards and would kick in immediately," Nixon said Friday.
Projections of school funding losses compiled by the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and released by Nixon's office show districts could lose up to $450 million this year if a veto override occurs and Congress passes the Marketplace Fairness Act, which would allow, although not require, states to collect taxes on online sales. Missouri also would have to use the new law for the cuts to education funding to be that large. Without the act passing, DESE estimates the cut to school districts would be $260 million if House Bill 253 goes into effect.
House Speaker Tim Jones last week called the projections and claims by Nixon "fear mongering" and that the governor only wants to "prevent tax relief."
Republicans also say they doubt the Marketplace Fairness Act will pass Congress, so it should be left out of the equation in claims it will bring cuts to funding for schools.
Grow Missouri says House Bill 253 will help the state's economy by lowering income taxes for the first time in 100 years and allow people who are delinquent on their taxes an opportunity to get back to compliance.
Missouri, according to the coalition, will lose businesses and income to neighboring states that have lowered income taxes because "income migrates to where it is treated the best."
The coalition represents business groups such as the Missouri Chamber of Commerce, the National Federation of Independent Businesses and the Associated Industries of Missouri. A major contributor to the coalition is billionaire Rex Sinquefield, who gave Grow Missouri $1.3 million to promote the veto override -- part of $2.4 million he has given to the groups pushing for it.
According to the figures from DESE released by Nixon, the 75 school districts which make up the state's Southeast Region would see a combined total loss of $22 million if the foundation formula for funding schools were reduced by $260 million this year, or $39 million if the formula were reduced by $450 million this year.
Republican members of the General Assembly also question why, if Nixon is so concerned about funding for schools, he decided to withhold $400 million from the state budget, including $66 million for K-12 schools.
The move, according to Nixon, is to partly to deal with the outcome he fears for House Bill 253. He told his audience Friday he is ready and willing to release the money for schools as soon as the Sept. 11 veto session has passed without an override of the bill.
Thursday, July 25, 2013
Here is what
Bernard Rimland had to say about inclusion
Inclusive Education: Right For Some
by Bernard Rimland, Ph.D.
Is there the parent of an autistic child who wouldn't be delighted beyond words if the child would simply blend smoothly into a regular classroom? That is a dream we all share. For a few, the dream becomes a reality. Over the years I have heard from a number of parents who have shared with us their joy, their pride and their good fortune: "Billy has been included in a regular classroom! He is having a hard time adjusting, but he is making it!" But, for every parent whose child "makes it," there are many more who are not so fortunate.
Much as my wife and I would like to have our autistic son Mark be able to cope successfully in a normal school, it is very clear to us that he could not have done so. He has come along much farther than we ever dared hope, and we are quite confident it is because he was always in special classes, taught by experienced, skilled, caring teachers, exhibiting monumental patience, who had gone to great lengths to train themselves in methods which would help Mark and children like him achieve their full potential.
If a child can be effectively "included," he probably should be. Lovaas got excellent results by mainstreaming the most successful of his early intervention group, but only after intensive training. But there is a difference between inclusion and over inclusion.
If your child functions far below the normal child intellectually, academically, and socially, does it make sense to insist that he or she be "included" in a regular classroom? Certainly not, in my view, and in the view of many, if not the vast majority, of parents of autistic children.
Today special schools and special classes for autistic children are under heavy attack by people promoting "full inclusion." What is full inclusion? Full inclusion means abolishing the special educational provisions that are vitally important to autistic children.
Unfortunately, many professionals and parents have adopted the ideology that full inclusion is the only option that should be made available for any child, irrespective of how inappropriate it may be for that child, and irrespective of the wishes of the parents of that child. What is worse, these people have managed to sway legislative and educational policy so that other options are prohibited. A quarter of a century ago those of us who pioneered public education for autistic children struggled long and hard to compel the educational system to provide things that we knew were necessary to the appropriate education of our children. This included, first and foremost, teachers who were trained in the techniques of behavior modification and who understood the peculiarities of autistic children.
In the last issue of the ARRI we published a small article titled "Full inclusion: the right choice?" Our article was based on a report by Simpson and Sasso in which they noted that there was no empirical evidence showing that full inclusion was beneficial. It seems that the full inclusion movement has been so quickly bought by the educational establishment that those who believe that a full range of options should be available have not had time to organize any meaningful opposition. We received many letters and calls of thanks from parents who were pleased to see that were addressing this issue.
Several years ago I received an urgent plea for help from a group of parents in Michigan whose children attended the Burger Center for Autistic Children. I was invited to speak there and made a tour of the facility. I was impressed. The staff were obviously very much involved with autism, the teaching of autistic children and all the details of autism. They communicated with each other with ideas and suggestions and enthusiasm that won my admiration. They certainly had the support of the parent group. The problem was that full inclusion was being heavily promoted in Michigan, and rational and efficient programs like the Burger School program for autism were in dire threat of being closed down.
by Bernard Rimland, Ph.D.
Is there the parent of an autistic child who wouldn't be delighted beyond words if the child would simply blend smoothly into a regular classroom? That is a dream we all share. For a few, the dream becomes a reality. Over the years I have heard from a number of parents who have shared with us their joy, their pride and their good fortune: "Billy has been included in a regular classroom! He is having a hard time adjusting, but he is making it!" But, for every parent whose child "makes it," there are many more who are not so fortunate.
Much as my wife and I would like to have our autistic son Mark be able to cope successfully in a normal school, it is very clear to us that he could not have done so. He has come along much farther than we ever dared hope, and we are quite confident it is because he was always in special classes, taught by experienced, skilled, caring teachers, exhibiting monumental patience, who had gone to great lengths to train themselves in methods which would help Mark and children like him achieve their full potential.
If a child can be effectively "included," he probably should be. Lovaas got excellent results by mainstreaming the most successful of his early intervention group, but only after intensive training. But there is a difference between inclusion and over inclusion.
If your child functions far below the normal child intellectually, academically, and socially, does it make sense to insist that he or she be "included" in a regular classroom? Certainly not, in my view, and in the view of many, if not the vast majority, of parents of autistic children.
Today special schools and special classes for autistic children are under heavy attack by people promoting "full inclusion." What is full inclusion? Full inclusion means abolishing the special educational provisions that are vitally important to autistic children.
Unfortunately, many professionals and parents have adopted the ideology that full inclusion is the only option that should be made available for any child, irrespective of how inappropriate it may be for that child, and irrespective of the wishes of the parents of that child. What is worse, these people have managed to sway legislative and educational policy so that other options are prohibited. A quarter of a century ago those of us who pioneered public education for autistic children struggled long and hard to compel the educational system to provide things that we knew were necessary to the appropriate education of our children. This included, first and foremost, teachers who were trained in the techniques of behavior modification and who understood the peculiarities of autistic children.
In the last issue of the ARRI we published a small article titled "Full inclusion: the right choice?" Our article was based on a report by Simpson and Sasso in which they noted that there was no empirical evidence showing that full inclusion was beneficial. It seems that the full inclusion movement has been so quickly bought by the educational establishment that those who believe that a full range of options should be available have not had time to organize any meaningful opposition. We received many letters and calls of thanks from parents who were pleased to see that were addressing this issue.
Several years ago I received an urgent plea for help from a group of parents in Michigan whose children attended the Burger Center for Autistic Children. I was invited to speak there and made a tour of the facility. I was impressed. The staff were obviously very much involved with autism, the teaching of autistic children and all the details of autism. They communicated with each other with ideas and suggestions and enthusiasm that won my admiration. They certainly had the support of the parent group. The problem was that full inclusion was being heavily promoted in Michigan, and rational and efficient programs like the Burger School program for autism were in dire threat of being closed down.
I have no quarrel with inclusionists if they are content
to insist upon inclusion for their children, or for children of other parents
who feel that it is optimum for their children. But, when they try to force me
and other unwilling parents to dance to their tune, I find it highly
objectionable and quite intolerable. Parents need options.
If there are no objective data showing that full inclusion works better than giving people several options, why is it being promoted so avidly? Douglas Billen attempts to answer that question solely on ideological grounds. In his book, Achieving the Complete School, he says of mainstreaming, "To ask, Does it work? is to ask the wrong question." He believes that full inclusion and mainstreaming should be the only choice available to us because it is the right choice, the right thing to do. He makes an analogy with slavery. Slavery, he says, was abolished because it was morally wrong, not because it didn't work. He also asserts that objective scientific data are irrelevant, because the issue is a moral one.
I disagree strongly with Biklen on both counts. Biklen has the slavery analogy exactly backward: making full inclusion the only option does not resemble the abolition of slavery, but instead the imposition of slavery. Like slavery, full inclusion rejects the idea that people should be free to choose for themselves the options they desire, and compels them to accede to the wishes of others. And as for Biklen's rejection of scientific data, I want my children educated in ways that will assure the best outcome, as learned from scientific studies, not in ways that accord with someone's theory, or ideology, or the educational fad of the year.
Special education consultant Laurence Lieberman is one of the very few educators with the courage to speak out and tell the wrong. Recently the National Association of State Boards of Education endorsed the principle of full inclusion of students with disabilities. Lieberman's insightful response, published as a letter to the editor in EducationWeek for December 16, 1992, is a classic, and is reprinted here in part:
"People involved in education cannot agree on school choice, on promotion policies, on achievement testing, on curricula, teaching approaches, or the distribution of condoms. But all the state boards of education can agree on full inclusion for all disabled students?
"This is obviously a money issue, pure and simple. The key may be found in the paragraph in your story that says a new report from NASBE proposes that funds be provided on the basis of instructional need, not head counts. That need seems to have been already predetermined by the organization; full inclusion in regular classrooms for all disabled students.
"The article-and quite possibly the report-refuses to deal with the real nature of some children, which might require that they not be in a regular classroom.
"Some educators would place the issue of full inclusion solely in the realm of morality. Anything separate is evil. There may be a higher immorality than separateness: lack of progress, lack of achievement, lack of skills, and splintered learning of meaningless academic trivia.
"There is the issue that special education hasn't been effective. Where, and for whom and why? Because it has been too separate? Unlikely. There regular classroom is not separate by definition. Has it worked? Sometimes, but not all of the time. Placing severely disabled students in regular classrooms presupposes a level of individualization that does not exist.
"Some educators believe that disabled children will be much more accepted, and society as a whole will show much greater compassion for the disabled, if all children are in regular classrooms. Knowledge does not necessarily lead to compassion.
"There is a common belief that when disabled children are in physical proximity to normal children they will tend to adopt more normal behavior patterns. This is obviously not the case with many autistic children, who generally begin life surrounded by normal families.
"Full inclusion is not the right thing to do. It is one right thing to do, sometimes.
"Any organization...that endorses full inclusion is taking an extremist position that has no place in an educational system and a society that prides itself on its choices and multiple ways to achieve a desired quality of life."
I agree with Lieberman. If special education for autism is destroyed, it will be lost for at least one generation, and perhaps several.
If there are no objective data showing that full inclusion works better than giving people several options, why is it being promoted so avidly? Douglas Billen attempts to answer that question solely on ideological grounds. In his book, Achieving the Complete School, he says of mainstreaming, "To ask, Does it work? is to ask the wrong question." He believes that full inclusion and mainstreaming should be the only choice available to us because it is the right choice, the right thing to do. He makes an analogy with slavery. Slavery, he says, was abolished because it was morally wrong, not because it didn't work. He also asserts that objective scientific data are irrelevant, because the issue is a moral one.
I disagree strongly with Biklen on both counts. Biklen has the slavery analogy exactly backward: making full inclusion the only option does not resemble the abolition of slavery, but instead the imposition of slavery. Like slavery, full inclusion rejects the idea that people should be free to choose for themselves the options they desire, and compels them to accede to the wishes of others. And as for Biklen's rejection of scientific data, I want my children educated in ways that will assure the best outcome, as learned from scientific studies, not in ways that accord with someone's theory, or ideology, or the educational fad of the year.
Special education consultant Laurence Lieberman is one of the very few educators with the courage to speak out and tell the wrong. Recently the National Association of State Boards of Education endorsed the principle of full inclusion of students with disabilities. Lieberman's insightful response, published as a letter to the editor in EducationWeek for December 16, 1992, is a classic, and is reprinted here in part:
"People involved in education cannot agree on school choice, on promotion policies, on achievement testing, on curricula, teaching approaches, or the distribution of condoms. But all the state boards of education can agree on full inclusion for all disabled students?
"This is obviously a money issue, pure and simple. The key may be found in the paragraph in your story that says a new report from NASBE proposes that funds be provided on the basis of instructional need, not head counts. That need seems to have been already predetermined by the organization; full inclusion in regular classrooms for all disabled students.
"The article-and quite possibly the report-refuses to deal with the real nature of some children, which might require that they not be in a regular classroom.
"Some educators would place the issue of full inclusion solely in the realm of morality. Anything separate is evil. There may be a higher immorality than separateness: lack of progress, lack of achievement, lack of skills, and splintered learning of meaningless academic trivia.
"There is the issue that special education hasn't been effective. Where, and for whom and why? Because it has been too separate? Unlikely. There regular classroom is not separate by definition. Has it worked? Sometimes, but not all of the time. Placing severely disabled students in regular classrooms presupposes a level of individualization that does not exist.
"Some educators believe that disabled children will be much more accepted, and society as a whole will show much greater compassion for the disabled, if all children are in regular classrooms. Knowledge does not necessarily lead to compassion.
"There is a common belief that when disabled children are in physical proximity to normal children they will tend to adopt more normal behavior patterns. This is obviously not the case with many autistic children, who generally begin life surrounded by normal families.
"Full inclusion is not the right thing to do. It is one right thing to do, sometimes.
"Any organization...that endorses full inclusion is taking an extremist position that has no place in an educational system and a society that prides itself on its choices and multiple ways to achieve a desired quality of life."
I agree with Lieberman. If special education for autism is destroyed, it will be lost for at least one generation, and perhaps several.
Wednesday, July 24, 2013
Lee's Summit R-7 School District: Information That The President Might Like To Know
Lee's Summit R-7 School District: Information That The President Might Like To Know
The Lee's Summit School District has been investigated by the OCR for civil rights violations. They were forced to enter into a resolution agreement. Not too many of their residents are aware of the issues that this district is really facing. Stay tuned for more.
The Lee's Summit School District has been investigated by the OCR for civil rights violations. They were forced to enter into a resolution agreement. Not too many of their residents are aware of the issues that this district is really facing. Stay tuned for more.
Jeff Grisamore Not: Please Help Me Stop the Bullying of Children
Jeff Grisamore Not: Please Help Me Stop the Bullying of Children
Hello!
I've started the petition “Create a law that protects children from bullying by teachers" and need your help to get it off the ground.
Will you take 30 seconds to sign it right now? Here's the link:
http://www.change.org/petitions/create-a-law-that-protects-children-from-bullying-by-teachers
Here's why it's important:
It is essential that all children are safe from every kind of bullying and school remains a place to learn and not a place to fear.
Did you know that the Kansas now has an Anti-Bullying Law that not only protects students from bullying by students, but also by teachers and other school staff?
We need a similar law in Missouri. The children of Missouri need the same protection as children in other states. Children’s lives are being destroyed every day. We cannot keep them safe without legislation. That has proven to be the case over and over again.
While it is well-known that bullying by peers is commonplace, bullying by teachers can be even more harmful to children and represents an abuse of power. Studies show that bullying perpetrated by an adult, such as a teacher, can be even more harmful than bullying by a peer, quadrupling the child’s odds of suicidal thinking.
The bullying by a teacher effectively produces a hostile climate for the student that is indefensible on academic grounds; undermining learning and the ability of a student to fulfill academic requirements. It shares at its core the same attributes of other abuses of power such as sexual harassment or hate crimes. A hate crime is simply bullying by target selection based on characteristics of race, sexual orientation or religious beliefs
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/1195574
You can sign my petition by clicking here.
Thanks!
Sherri Tucker
Hello!
I've started the petition “Create a law that protects children from bullying by teachers" and need your help to get it off the ground.
Will you take 30 seconds to sign it right now? Here's the link:
http://www.change.org/petitions/create-a-law-that-protects-children-from-bullying-by-teachers
Here's why it's important:
It is essential that all children are safe from every kind of bullying and school remains a place to learn and not a place to fear.
Did you know that the Kansas now has an Anti-Bullying Law that not only protects students from bullying by students, but also by teachers and other school staff?
We need a similar law in Missouri. The children of Missouri need the same protection as children in other states. Children’s lives are being destroyed every day. We cannot keep them safe without legislation. That has proven to be the case over and over again.
Teacher bullying gets little attention, say Stuart Twemlow, MD, a psychiatrist who directs the Peaceful Schools and Communities Project at the Menninger Clinic in Houston. But his new study, published in The International Journal of Social Psychiatry, hints that the problem may be more common than people believe.
In his anonymous survey of 116 teachers at seven elementary schools, more than 70% said they believed that bullying was isolated. But 45% admitted to having bullied a student. "I was surprised at how many teachers were willing to be honest," Twemlow says.
He defines teacher bullying as "using power to punish, manipulate, or disparage a student beyond what would be a reasonable disciplinary procedure."
While it is well-known that bullying by peers is commonplace, bullying by teachers can be even more harmful to children and represents an abuse of power. Studies show that bullying perpetrated by an adult, such as a teacher, can be even more harmful than bullying by a peer, quadrupling the child’s odds of suicidal thinking.
The bullying by a teacher effectively produces a hostile climate for the student that is indefensible on academic grounds; undermining learning and the ability of a student to fulfill academic requirements. It shares at its core the same attributes of other abuses of power such as sexual harassment or hate crimes. A hate crime is simply bullying by target selection based on characteristics of race, sexual orientation or religious beliefs
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/1195574
You can sign my petition by clicking here.
Thanks!
Sherri Tucker
Lee’s Summit schools to be highlighted in Obama speech | fox4kc.com
Lee’s Summit schools to be highlighted in Obama speech | fox4kc.com
This is an outstanding program and Lee's Summit should be pleased with their success. However, they only put this much effort into programs that make them look good. I wish that they had put this much time, money, and effort into my son's education. He might have been a high school graduate instead of a high school dropout. Lee's Summit will never put money or effort into those that will not make them look good. Sad, but true.
LEE’S SUMMIT, Mo. – President Barack Obama will speak at the University of Central Missouri Wednesday to talk about the economy.
As part of his remarks, the White House said Obama will talk about the Lee’s Summit’s School District’s accelerated engineering program.
The program accepts juniors and seniors from 19 Missouri high schools and allows them to earn a bachelor’s degree in just two years after they graduate from high school.
Seventeen-year-old Matt Orson says the program allows him to get hands on experience by working with partnering companies to hone his skills before he gets out in the real world.
“I’m super, super happy that something like this could happen to me, not many people get this opportunity to get their college paid for and to get hands on experience with a job,” said Orson.
Dr Don Andrews, Assistant Superintendent for the Lee’s Summit School District, says there is no other program like it in the country.
While the 32 students enrolled in the program are getting a once in a lifetime opportunity to earn and four-year degree for free, they’re in for a another awesome experience because they’ll meet President Barack Obama when he speaks at the University of Central Missouri Wednesday.
This is an outstanding program and Lee's Summit should be pleased with their success. However, they only put this much effort into programs that make them look good. I wish that they had put this much time, money, and effort into my son's education. He might have been a high school graduate instead of a high school dropout. Lee's Summit will never put money or effort into those that will not make them look good. Sad, but true.
LEE’S SUMMIT, Mo. – President Barack Obama will speak at the University of Central Missouri Wednesday to talk about the economy.
As part of his remarks, the White House said Obama will talk about the Lee’s Summit’s School District’s accelerated engineering program.
The program accepts juniors and seniors from 19 Missouri high schools and allows them to earn a bachelor’s degree in just two years after they graduate from high school.
Seventeen-year-old Matt Orson says the program allows him to get hands on experience by working with partnering companies to hone his skills before he gets out in the real world.
“I’m super, super happy that something like this could happen to me, not many people get this opportunity to get their college paid for and to get hands on experience with a job,” said Orson.
Dr Don Andrews, Assistant Superintendent for the Lee’s Summit School District, says there is no other program like it in the country.
While the 32 students enrolled in the program are getting a once in a lifetime opportunity to earn and four-year degree for free, they’re in for a another awesome experience because they’ll meet President Barack Obama when he speaks at the University of Central Missouri Wednesday.
Tuesday, July 23, 2013
New law aids parents of special needs children in dealing with school districts | Tampa Bay Times
New law aids parents of special needs children in dealing with school districts | Tampa Bay Times
TAMPA — For three hours Kate Grantham faced a panel of school officials to hash out a plan for her daughter's education.
About half that time, the two sides discussed how much physical therapy the school would give Sarah, who has a condition that resembles cerebral palsy.
"I tried to use all the sales words I've learned along the way," Grantham said. "Like, if this were your child, would you be satisfied with 30 minutes? I was getting very irritated."
It is a task parents of special needs children sometimes dread: the summit to discuss a student's "individual education plan."
Held annually, or sometimes more frequently, the meetings result in a legal document, called an IEP, that outlines a child's learning goals and what educators will do to help meet them.
They can be daunting, confrontational affairs, as educators and parents often disagree on a course that works best for both the district and the child.
A new Florida law aims to give parents a leg up by helping them better understand their rights and limiting what districts can mandate without their consent. It affects roughly 350,000 students statewide, including more than 50,000 in Tampa Bay.
The measure was introduced by Republican state Sens. Andy Gardiner of Orlando and John Thrasher of St. Augustine. Both have relatives with Down syndrome — Gardiner a son and Thrasher a grandson.
It requires signed documents attesting that no one discouraged a parent from bringing an advocate or other adult witness to an IEP meeting.
It mandates parents give their consent before the district can place a student on a special education diploma track — something that happens as early as elementary school — or moves a child from a typical school to a special center.
Districts must disclose how much state funding they are getting for a child's services. And there is a mandatory 10-day notice to schedule the meetings, addressing the complaint that parents sometimes are called in at the last minute.
In addition to IEPs, the law applies to documents such as the 504 plan, which provides accommodations under the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
Especially significant, said Tallahassee attorney and advocate Ann Siegel: "We finally have a definition for inclusion."
The new law defines inclusion as an education in a regular class "reflecting natural proportions and age-appropriate heterogeneous groups" in core academic classes and electives.
What's more, it says, "a student with a disability is a valued member of the classroom and school community," and teachers and administrators must be equipped to teach all children.
To some degree, advocates say, the new measure clarifies provisions that already exist under federal law, which entitles disabled children to a "free appropriate public education" in the "least restrictive environment."
In reality, however, parents often feel overmatched at IEP meetings, especially if the child's issues require a large number of therapists and administrators around the table.
When told that funding limits make it impossible to provide all kinds of services at a neighborhood school, some parents agree to send their kids to centers instead.
"They try to make you feel like, 'We're all in it for the best interest of the child,' but there's always that feeling that it's you against them," said Grantham, whose daughter, now 6, recently was placed in a special center.
Roberta Moore of Tampa told the Hillsborough County School Board she agreed to put her child on a special diploma track so his FCAT scores would not hurt the school grade.
"There's a complete intimidation factor," said Scott Tobia of Apollo Beach, whose daughter has medical needs and motor deficiencies stemming from a mitochondrial disorder that affects her metabolism.
Tobia has waged several battles with the Hillsborough district since Laura, now 7, entered kindergarten.
"You have 10 different people around the table," he said. "If you take an advocate, they bring an attorney."
Opinions differ as to whether the new law will create slightly more paperwork or truly change the tenor of meetings.
Hillsborough special education advocate Claudia Roberts said she is encouraged by a provision that requires districts to assess every three years how well they are practicing inclusion.
Those assessments will provide important data, Roberts said, and "data that is measured and reported can be a very valuable tool in making changes to the way students are being educated."
In Pasco County, ESE director Melissa Musselwhite said her district already collaborates with the Florida Inclusion Network. Pasco allows parents to bring advocates and observers to IEP meetings and make audio recordings. "A lot of this will require us to make adjustments, but a lot of it also is work we already do," she said.
The most dramatic change, she said, will come from the requirement that the district allow private therapists to work with children in the schools.
But she said that's mostly a logistical issue, as school officials will need to make sure there is not too great a disruption to instruction.
Also unclear is how the state will reconcile testing provisions in the law with a federal mandate that all children, regardless of disabilities, take standardized tests for purposes of school accountability.
Marlene Sokol can be reached at (813) 226-3356 or sokol@tampabay.com.
TAMPA — For three hours Kate Grantham faced a panel of school officials to hash out a plan for her daughter's education.
About half that time, the two sides discussed how much physical therapy the school would give Sarah, who has a condition that resembles cerebral palsy.
"I tried to use all the sales words I've learned along the way," Grantham said. "Like, if this were your child, would you be satisfied with 30 minutes? I was getting very irritated."
It is a task parents of special needs children sometimes dread: the summit to discuss a student's "individual education plan."
Held annually, or sometimes more frequently, the meetings result in a legal document, called an IEP, that outlines a child's learning goals and what educators will do to help meet them.
They can be daunting, confrontational affairs, as educators and parents often disagree on a course that works best for both the district and the child.
A new Florida law aims to give parents a leg up by helping them better understand their rights and limiting what districts can mandate without their consent. It affects roughly 350,000 students statewide, including more than 50,000 in Tampa Bay.
The measure was introduced by Republican state Sens. Andy Gardiner of Orlando and John Thrasher of St. Augustine. Both have relatives with Down syndrome — Gardiner a son and Thrasher a grandson.
It requires signed documents attesting that no one discouraged a parent from bringing an advocate or other adult witness to an IEP meeting.
It mandates parents give their consent before the district can place a student on a special education diploma track — something that happens as early as elementary school — or moves a child from a typical school to a special center.
Districts must disclose how much state funding they are getting for a child's services. And there is a mandatory 10-day notice to schedule the meetings, addressing the complaint that parents sometimes are called in at the last minute.
In addition to IEPs, the law applies to documents such as the 504 plan, which provides accommodations under the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
Especially significant, said Tallahassee attorney and advocate Ann Siegel: "We finally have a definition for inclusion."
The new law defines inclusion as an education in a regular class "reflecting natural proportions and age-appropriate heterogeneous groups" in core academic classes and electives.
What's more, it says, "a student with a disability is a valued member of the classroom and school community," and teachers and administrators must be equipped to teach all children.
To some degree, advocates say, the new measure clarifies provisions that already exist under federal law, which entitles disabled children to a "free appropriate public education" in the "least restrictive environment."
In reality, however, parents often feel overmatched at IEP meetings, especially if the child's issues require a large number of therapists and administrators around the table.
When told that funding limits make it impossible to provide all kinds of services at a neighborhood school, some parents agree to send their kids to centers instead.
"They try to make you feel like, 'We're all in it for the best interest of the child,' but there's always that feeling that it's you against them," said Grantham, whose daughter, now 6, recently was placed in a special center.
Roberta Moore of Tampa told the Hillsborough County School Board she agreed to put her child on a special diploma track so his FCAT scores would not hurt the school grade.
"There's a complete intimidation factor," said Scott Tobia of Apollo Beach, whose daughter has medical needs and motor deficiencies stemming from a mitochondrial disorder that affects her metabolism.
Tobia has waged several battles with the Hillsborough district since Laura, now 7, entered kindergarten.
"You have 10 different people around the table," he said. "If you take an advocate, they bring an attorney."
Opinions differ as to whether the new law will create slightly more paperwork or truly change the tenor of meetings.
Hillsborough special education advocate Claudia Roberts said she is encouraged by a provision that requires districts to assess every three years how well they are practicing inclusion.
Those assessments will provide important data, Roberts said, and "data that is measured and reported can be a very valuable tool in making changes to the way students are being educated."
In Pasco County, ESE director Melissa Musselwhite said her district already collaborates with the Florida Inclusion Network. Pasco allows parents to bring advocates and observers to IEP meetings and make audio recordings. "A lot of this will require us to make adjustments, but a lot of it also is work we already do," she said.
The most dramatic change, she said, will come from the requirement that the district allow private therapists to work with children in the schools.
But she said that's mostly a logistical issue, as school officials will need to make sure there is not too great a disruption to instruction.
Also unclear is how the state will reconcile testing provisions in the law with a federal mandate that all children, regardless of disabilities, take standardized tests for purposes of school accountability.
Marlene Sokol can be reached at (813) 226-3356 or sokol@tampabay.com.
Monday, July 22, 2013
People with milder forms of autism struggle as adults — SFARI.org - Simons Foundation Autism Research Initiative
People with milder forms of autism struggle as adults — SFARI.org - Simons Foundation Autism Research Initiative
Deborah Rudacille
In fact, people diagnosed with pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS) are no more likely to marry or have a job than those with more disabling forms of autism, according to a Norwegian study published online in June in the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders1.
Early intervention has the potential to alter this trajectory, say experts. But until today’s children with autism reach maturity, it will be hard to say how much behavioral intervention at a young age can alter the course of their lives.
“The implication of our findings is that the consequences of having an autism spectrum disorder with profound difficulties in communication skills and social impairment can’t be compensated for by either high intellectual level or normal language function,” says lead investigator Anne Myhre, associate professor of mental health and addiction at the University of Oslo in Norway.
These findings provide support for the proposed merging of pervasive developmental disorder into the autism spectrum in the DSM-5, the edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) set to be published in 2013, the researchers say.
The new edition of the manual takes a spectrum approach, absorbing the separate categories of childhood disintegrative disorder, Asperger syndrome and PDD-NOS into the broad category of autism spectrum disorder. The draft guidelines note that symptoms must appear in early childhood and affect everyday functioning.
“I’m glad that the authors see this as support for the DSM-5 proposed definitions,” says Sally Rogers, professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the University of California, Davis’ MIND Institute. Rogers is a member of the neurodevelopmental working group revising the diagnostic criteria for autism.
All were treated in the children’s unit at the National Centre for Child and Adolescent Psychiatry in Oslo, Norway, between 1968 and 1988. The researchers tracked these participants using government-issued identification numbers.
They found that by age 22, 96 percent of the group had been awarded a disability pension from the government. Nearly all were unmarried — 99 percent of those with autistic disorder, compared with 92 percent of those with PDD-NOS. The crime rate for the group as a whole was little more than half that of the general population, although more individuals with PDD-NOS than autism had been convicted of a crime.
The study’s comparatively bleak findings are a surprise, say experts.
“The PDD-NOS group is generally better functioning, at least in childhood, so we would expect them to do better as adults,” says Sigmund Eldevik, associate professor of behavioral science at the Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, who was not involved with the study.
In July, Eldevik reported that young children with autism who receive behavioral interventions in preschool have higher IQs and adaptive behavior scores than those who do not receive the intervention2.
However, the individuals in Myhre’s study grew up during a time when autism was typically diagnosed later in childhood, and there were few early intervention programs.
For example, autism was not classified as separate from schizophrenia until the release of the third edition of the DSM in 1980. And Asperger syndrome and PDD-NOS were not included until the DSM-IV’s release in 1994.
To address the diagnostic changes, the researchers used detailed descriptions of symptoms, psychological test results, school performance and other records to retroactively diagnose autism or PDD-NOS in the study participants according to DSM-IV criteria.
Eldevik says the changes in DSM subcategories would probably not affect the study’s findings, however, as clinicians in Norway generally use the International Classification of Diseases (ICD).
“The PDD-NOS diagnosis from DSM-IV is very similar to the ‘Atypical Autism’ diagnosis from ICD-10, which we are using in Norway,” he says.
What’s more, other studies of individuals with PDD-NOS have turned up similar results. A 2009 European study reported that few individuals with PDD-NOS, autism or Asperger syndrome live independently3. That study found that antisocial personality disorder and substance abuse are more common in the PDD-NOS group, together with the mood and anxiety disorders shared by all the subgroups. Although all 122 people in the study have normal IQs, only 40 percent were employed at the time of the study, and 84 percent had never been in a long-term relationship.
For example, a study published earlier this year found that in the U.S., young adults on the spectrum who do not have an intellectual disability are in some ways worse off than those who do, as there are fewer programs to support their needs. They are at least three times more likely to have no structured daytime activities, for example4. Another study by some of the same researchers showed that 70 adults with Down syndrome enjoy higher levels of independence, more social opportunities and receive more services compared with 70 adults who have autism5.
This picture of limited opportunity for social engagement and growing isolation in adulthood for those on the spectrum is replicated by a study in April, which showed that more than half of young adults with autism had not gotten together with friends in the previous year6. Another study in February found that close to 40 percent of young adults with autism in the U.S. receive no services whatsoever after high school graduation.
In Norway, people on the spectrum are eligible for a government disability pension at age 18. Although only 5 percent of the Norwegian population as a whole receives this pension, 89 percent of individuals with autism in the new study receive it, as do 72 percent of the PDD-NOS group.
The higher level of intellectual disability in the autism group may explain the lower levels of disability awards in the PDD-NOS group, says Rogers. “This suggests that interventions that increase intellectual abilities will lead to better outcomes,” she says. Although most studies suggest that those with higher IQs don’t necessarily fare better in life, those individuals did not benefit from the kind of targeted early interventions now available, which address both intellectual and social functioning, she says.
High-quality early intervention is the only treatment that has shown improvement in intellectual functioning in people with the disorder, Rogers says. As more individuals with the disorder are diagnosed and receive treatment early on, future generations may face better outcomes.
Early intervention is already leading to markedly better intellectual functioning in children with autism, says Amy Wetherby, professor of communication science and disorders at Florida State University.
“The whole landscape of autism is changing because we are better at identifying the cognitively higher-functioning individuals,” she says. “With good early intervention, most end up within normal limits [on intelligence tests].”
People with milder forms of autism struggle as adults
E-mail Print Share This
Print Share This 8 September 2011
- Blurred boundaries: Social skills have a greater impact on quality of life for people on the autism spectrum than do any specific diagnoses.
In fact, people diagnosed with pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS) are no more likely to marry or have a job than those with more disabling forms of autism, according to a Norwegian study published online in June in the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders1.
Early intervention has the potential to alter this trajectory, say experts. But until today’s children with autism reach maturity, it will be hard to say how much behavioral intervention at a young age can alter the course of their lives.
“The implication of our findings is that the consequences of having an autism spectrum disorder with profound difficulties in communication skills and social impairment can’t be compensated for by either high intellectual level or normal language function,” says lead investigator Anne Myhre, associate professor of mental health and addiction at the University of Oslo in Norway.
These findings provide support for the proposed merging of pervasive developmental disorder into the autism spectrum in the DSM-5, the edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) set to be published in 2013, the researchers say.
The new edition of the manual takes a spectrum approach, absorbing the separate categories of childhood disintegrative disorder, Asperger syndrome and PDD-NOS into the broad category of autism spectrum disorder. The draft guidelines note that symptoms must appear in early childhood and affect everyday functioning.
“I’m glad that the authors see this as support for the DSM-5 proposed definitions,” says Sally Rogers, professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the University of California, Davis’ MIND Institute. Rogers is a member of the neurodevelopmental working group revising the diagnostic criteria for autism.
Single and disabled:
Myhre’s team investigated marital status, mortality and criminal records, and disability pension awards for 113 individuals who would meet contemporary criteria for autism. Of that number, 39 fall into the PDD-NOS category. More than half the participants — including 23 of the 39 with PDD-NOS — have an intelligence quotient (IQ) of 70 or less.All were treated in the children’s unit at the National Centre for Child and Adolescent Psychiatry in Oslo, Norway, between 1968 and 1988. The researchers tracked these participants using government-issued identification numbers.
They found that by age 22, 96 percent of the group had been awarded a disability pension from the government. Nearly all were unmarried — 99 percent of those with autistic disorder, compared with 92 percent of those with PDD-NOS. The crime rate for the group as a whole was little more than half that of the general population, although more individuals with PDD-NOS than autism had been convicted of a crime.
The study’s comparatively bleak findings are a surprise, say experts.
“The PDD-NOS group is generally better functioning, at least in childhood, so we would expect them to do better as adults,” says Sigmund Eldevik, associate professor of behavioral science at the Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, who was not involved with the study.
In July, Eldevik reported that young children with autism who receive behavioral interventions in preschool have higher IQs and adaptive behavior scores than those who do not receive the intervention2.
However, the individuals in Myhre’s study grew up during a time when autism was typically diagnosed later in childhood, and there were few early intervention programs.
For example, autism was not classified as separate from schizophrenia until the release of the third edition of the DSM in 1980. And Asperger syndrome and PDD-NOS were not included until the DSM-IV’s release in 1994.
To address the diagnostic changes, the researchers used detailed descriptions of symptoms, psychological test results, school performance and other records to retroactively diagnose autism or PDD-NOS in the study participants according to DSM-IV criteria.
Eldevik says the changes in DSM subcategories would probably not affect the study’s findings, however, as clinicians in Norway generally use the International Classification of Diseases (ICD).
“The PDD-NOS diagnosis from DSM-IV is very similar to the ‘Atypical Autism’ diagnosis from ICD-10, which we are using in Norway,” he says.
What’s more, other studies of individuals with PDD-NOS have turned up similar results. A 2009 European study reported that few individuals with PDD-NOS, autism or Asperger syndrome live independently3. That study found that antisocial personality disorder and substance abuse are more common in the PDD-NOS group, together with the mood and anxiety disorders shared by all the subgroups. Although all 122 people in the study have normal IQs, only 40 percent were employed at the time of the study, and 84 percent had never been in a long-term relationship.
Limited opportunities:
Relatively few long-term studies report on individuals with PDD-NOS but, in general, research on social and employment prospects for people on the autism spectrum are not encouraging.For example, a study published earlier this year found that in the U.S., young adults on the spectrum who do not have an intellectual disability are in some ways worse off than those who do, as there are fewer programs to support their needs. They are at least three times more likely to have no structured daytime activities, for example4. Another study by some of the same researchers showed that 70 adults with Down syndrome enjoy higher levels of independence, more social opportunities and receive more services compared with 70 adults who have autism5.
This picture of limited opportunity for social engagement and growing isolation in adulthood for those on the spectrum is replicated by a study in April, which showed that more than half of young adults with autism had not gotten together with friends in the previous year6. Another study in February found that close to 40 percent of young adults with autism in the U.S. receive no services whatsoever after high school graduation.
In Norway, people on the spectrum are eligible for a government disability pension at age 18. Although only 5 percent of the Norwegian population as a whole receives this pension, 89 percent of individuals with autism in the new study receive it, as do 72 percent of the PDD-NOS group.
The higher level of intellectual disability in the autism group may explain the lower levels of disability awards in the PDD-NOS group, says Rogers. “This suggests that interventions that increase intellectual abilities will lead to better outcomes,” she says. Although most studies suggest that those with higher IQs don’t necessarily fare better in life, those individuals did not benefit from the kind of targeted early interventions now available, which address both intellectual and social functioning, she says.
High-quality early intervention is the only treatment that has shown improvement in intellectual functioning in people with the disorder, Rogers says. As more individuals with the disorder are diagnosed and receive treatment early on, future generations may face better outcomes.
Early intervention is already leading to markedly better intellectual functioning in children with autism, says Amy Wetherby, professor of communication science and disorders at Florida State University.
“The whole landscape of autism is changing because we are better at identifying the cognitively higher-functioning individuals,” she says. “With good early intervention, most end up within normal limits [on intelligence tests].”
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
Petition | Create a law that protects children from bullying by teachers | Change.org
Petition | Create a law that protects children from bullying by teachers | Change.org
It is essential that all children are safe from every kind of bullying and school remains a place to learn and not a place to fear.
Did you know that the Kansas now has an Anti-Bullying Law that not only protects students from bullying by students, but also by teachers and other school staff?
We need a similar law in Missouri. The children of Missouri need the same protection as children in other states. Children’s lives are being destroyed every day. We cannot keep them safe without legislation. That has proven to be the case over and over again.
While it is well-known that bullying by peers is commonplace, bullying by teachers can be even more harmful to children and represents an abuse of power. Studies show that bullying perpetrated by an adult, such as a teacher, can be even more harmful than bullying by a peer, quadrupling the child’s odds of suicidal thinking.
The bullying by a teacher effectively produces a hostile climate for the student that is indefensible on academic grounds; undermining learning and the ability of a student to fulfll academic requirements. It shares at its core the same attributes of other abuses of power such as sexual harassment or hate crimes. A hate crime is simply bullying by target selection based on characteristics of race, sexual orientation or religious beliefs
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/1195574
It is essential that all children are safe from every kind of bullying and school remains a place to learn and not a place to fear.
Did you know that the Kansas now has an Anti-Bullying Law that not only protects students from bullying by students, but also by teachers and other school staff?
We need a similar law in Missouri. The children of Missouri need the same protection as children in other states. Children’s lives are being destroyed every day. We cannot keep them safe without legislation. That has proven to be the case over and over again.
Teacher bullying gets little attention, say Stuart Twemlow, MD, a psychiatrist who directs the Peaceful Schools and Communities Project at the Menninger Clinic in Houston. But his new study, published in The International Journal of Social Psychiatry, hints that the problem may be more common than people believe.
In his anonymous survey of 116 teachers at seven elementary schools, more than 70% said they believed that bullying was isolated. But 45% admitted to having bullied a student. "I was surprised at how many teachers were willing to be honest," Twemlow says.
He defines teacher bullying as "using power to punish, manipulate, or disparage a student beyond what would be a reasonable disciplinary procedure."
While it is well-known that bullying by peers is commonplace, bullying by teachers can be even more harmful to children and represents an abuse of power. Studies show that bullying perpetrated by an adult, such as a teacher, can be even more harmful than bullying by a peer, quadrupling the child’s odds of suicidal thinking.
The bullying by a teacher effectively produces a hostile climate for the student that is indefensible on academic grounds; undermining learning and the ability of a student to fulfll academic requirements. It shares at its core the same attributes of other abuses of power such as sexual harassment or hate crimes. A hate crime is simply bullying by target selection based on characteristics of race, sexual orientation or religious beliefs
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/1195574
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
Fox C-6 Watchdogs: Documentation Contradicts Superintendent Dianne Critchlow's Statements at June 2013 Board Meeting!
Fox C-6 Watchdogs: Documentation Contradicts Superintendent Dianne Critchlow's Statements at June 2013 Board Meeting!
Documentation Contradicts Superintendent Dianne Critchlow's Statements at June 2013 Board Meeting!
Documentation Contradicts Superintendent Dianne Critchlow's Statements at June 2013 Board Meeting!
After I spoke during Public Comment at the June 2013 Fox C-6 School Board meeting regarding an open Resolution Agreement with the U.S. Department of Education and a Final Agency Decision from the USDA finding Fox C-6 and Missouri DESE non-compliant with Section 504, ADA and the ADAAA, Superintendent Dianne Critchlow stated that:
Why would our Superintendent say that we cannot discuss these issues? Because it doesn't reflect well on her or the district. If Superintendent Critchlow is truly keeping our school board informed on these issues, I would think the board would want to know why it has taken our District more than 4 years to meet the obligations of the Resolution Agreement they signed with ED OCR in May of 2009. Our school board should also be asking why the District is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees rather than correcting their documentation and complying with the law.
I'm sure our Superintendent had no idea that ED OCR would find a lot more problems in our District than just not wanting to properly follow Section 504 law. If you read the ED OCR Monitoring Letters you will see that the majority of the problems are with the district's policies and handbooks and complying with Section 504, ADA and ADAAA. It seemed to be a systemic issue which is why the Washington D.C. Office for Civil Rights decided to conduct a District Wide Compliance Review. The District Wide Compliance Review was initiated in March of 2010. Of course, the District attorneys argued that ED OCR was basically picking on our District and harassing them. Needless to say, ED OCR denied their request to rescind the District Wide Compliance Review. However, the District has done a very good job of dragging things out while spending a lot in legal fees.
I think that we should discuss the fact that our District can't seem to accomplish what the they originally agreed to have done by August 31, 2009. By reading through the original Resolution Agreement and then the Monitoring Letters and attorney responses, you will find that the District informed the ED OCR that it would have the policies and procedures updated by July 31, 2010 after it didn't make the 2009 dates. Then in 2012 the District informed ED OCR that they planned on having the updated policies and procedures completed by July of 2012. Well, that didn't happen either! So, here we are in July of 2013 and the District still hasn't completed revising its documentation.
Now that the USDA Office for Civil Rights (USDA OCR) has asked the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for assistance in bringing Fox C-6 and Missouri DESE into compliance, it appears to demonstrates the fact that our school district and many like ours simply ignore the federal agencies. I think this is mostly due to the fact that ED OCR "allows" the District to "voluntarily comply". And, since ED OCR just issues new deadlines and doesn't actually perform and enforcement, the school district's ignore them. It will be interesting to see how much money our school board plans to allow our Superintendent to spend on these issues before they decide to comply with the rulings and fulfill their obligations to the Resolution Agreement.
Below you will find some of the documentation showing the District's lack of compliance. Our Superintendent has a tendency to just throw out statements thinking or hoping everyone believes her. I like to provide the evidence that shows that what she says isn't always true!
Letters from the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR) and the USDA OCR document the fact that our district is NOT in full compliance.
The complaints I spoke of at the June 2013 board meeting are not in litigation. Only the Department of Justice can litigate a complaint with the District. Currently the USDA is working with Missouri DESE hoping that they will bring our district into compliance with the USDA's Final Agency Decision. If MO DESE fails to do so, the DOJ will then step in to bring about compliance. At that time, the District may possibly end up in litigation. But, at the moment, these complaints are not in litigation. Superintendent Critchlow throws out the litigation claim to keep things behind "closed doors" rather than speaking about them in the public session of the board meetings.
Not to rule out any possibilities! But, perhaps Superintendent Critchlow is simply having a difficult time accepting the fact that the Monitoring Letters from ED OCR and the USDA Final Agency Decision aren't accolades for our District. If you're curious, give them a read and see what you think. How would someone would document this on their resume as an accomplishment?
Click on the links below to open the documents from ED OCR, USDA OCR and our school district attorneys to get an understanding of how compliant or non-compliant the Fox C-6 School District really is with these agencies. Our school district has certainly invested a lot of money in attorney's fees just to keep from filling out proper paperwork like 504 Plans for students in our District!
May 1, 2009 Fox C-6 School District Resolution Agreement with ED OCR
December 8, 2009 ED OCR Issues First Monitoring Letter to Fox C-6 for May 1, 2009 Resolution Agreement
February 26, 2010 Fox C-6 District Attorney Teri Goldman Response to ED OCR's December 2009 Monitoring Letter and Conference Call
March 11, 2010 ED OCR Complaint Notification to Fox C-6 Regarding Due Process Hearing Officer Selection
March 19, 2010 Fox C-6 District Wide Compliance Review Notification Letter from ED OCR
Due Process Hearing Officer Selection Concerns
Would you be concerned if you were going to have go through a Due Process Hearing against your school district and the school district gets to choose the Due Process Hearing Officer to hear the case? Would you be more concerned if the school district chose a Due Process Hearing Officer that was a former law associate of the school district Attorney representing the school district in the Due Process Hearing? How about if you found out that they co-represented school districts together at law firms against parents? Would you be concerned if you found out that the two attorneys were presenters at a convention answering questions on the rules of Due Process and discussing topics such as "Testifying in Due Process Hearings"?
Section 504 Procedural Safeguards typically state that the parent or the school district can request a Due Process Hearing to resolve disputes Section 504 decisions. The safeguards state that the school district will choose the Due Process Hearing Officer. The Due Process Hearing Officer is typically an attorney who acts like a judge to hear both parties on a matter and render a decision. A hearing officer is supposed to be "Fair and Impartial". A quick Google search of the hearing officer chosen by the District immediately raised red flags considering the hearing officer chosen by the District was Mr. John Brink who was a former law associate of District attorney Teri Goldman in two different law firms. The choice of hearing officer can easily sway the outcome of a hearing. I know they are supposed to be "Fair and Impartial". But, as proof of my concern, I found several cases where Mr. Brink and Ms. Goldman while working for the same law firms co-represented school districts on cases. What was more troubling was the fact that Mr. Brink and Ms. Goldman were listed together as presenters at the 2007 Missouri Speech Language Hearing Association (MSHA) convention speaking about the rules pertaining to Due Process with one of their topics listed as "Testifying in Due Process Hearings". This is why we filed a complaint regarding our concerns over the school district's choice of the Due Process Hearing Officer with ED OCR.
District attorney Teri Goldman responded to ED OCR investigating our concerns. In her response to ED OCR she stated, "Since 2002, Ms. Goldman occasionally sees Mr. Brink at professional conferences (perhaps 1-2 times per year) and does converse with him at such conferences. Beyond that, she has no personal relationship with him. Since 2002, Ms. Goldman and Mr. Brink have not served as co-presenters contrary to the Simpson's representation. Neither Ms. Goldman nor the District know the basis for the Simpson's assertion in that regard." That's why I submitted the convention schedule brochure PDF document from the 2007 MSHA conference to ED OCR documenting our concern along with a photo of Mr. Brink and Ms. Goldman seated together at the conference luncheon. These documents were found on the MSHA website along with the URL links. Shortly after ED OCR reviewed our complaint and responses from the District, Ms. Goldman and Mr. Brink, the documents were removed from the MSHA website where they had been posted for nearly 3 years. I found it odd that the documents disappeared so quickly after ED OCR investigated our concerns.
So, is Ms. Goldman's statement true about not serving as co-presenters with Mr. Brink? I kept a copy of the MSHA Convention brochure and photo from the luncheon just in case. The session description can be found on page 24 of the program schedule from the following link:
2007 Missouri Speech-Language Hearing Association (MSHA) Convention Schedule
Below is District attorney Teri Goldman's response to ED OCR regarding our concerns of the Due Process Hearing Officer selection. Mr. Dan Baker stated that he was originally concerned after I brought it to the attention of the District and ED OCR that Mr. Brink and Ms. Goldman were former law associates. However, after speaking with District attorney Teri Goldman and she assured Mr. Baker that Mr. Brink would be fair and impartial, Mr. Baker was no longer concerned about the choice of the hearing officer. Apparently, Mr. Baker didn't know that Ms. Goldman and Mr. Brink were former law associates during a January 2009 Due Process Hearing that Mr. Baker was involved in with another family at Fox that was decided in favor of the school district.
August 18, 2011 - Fox C-6 and MO DESE Found
Non-Compliant with Section 504, ADA and ADAAA
March 13, 2012 - Fox C-6 Still Non-Compliant per ED OCR
ED OCR points out a lot of flaws in our District's student handbooks and school board policies that need to be updated. They also point out the fact that there are at least 7 different people identified in the District documentation as the District's 504 Coordinator on page 12. One of the persons listed hasn't worked for the District since 2008. I have to say that ED OCR is fairly thorough in their reading over of our District's Policies, Procedures and Student Handbooks.
March 13, 2012 ED OCR Monitoring Letter Update Sent to Fox C-6 Documenting Obligations Still Not Satisfied per the May 2009 Resolution Agreement
August 3, 2012 - Fox C-6 Still Non-Compliant per ED OCR
More of the same but with a little more detail of what needs to be corrected starting on page 10 of the document.
August 3, 2012 ED OCR Monitoring Letter Update Sent to Fox C-6 Documenting Obligations Still Not Satisfied per the May 2009 Resolution Agreement
April 25, 2013 - Fox C-6 Still Non-Compliant per ED OCR
The following April 25, 2013 ED OCR Monitoring Letter informed the Fox C-6 School District that it still has not met its obligations from the May 1, 2009 Resolution Agreement signed by Dan Baker. There have been 4 monitoring letters sent to the district since May 2009. Deadlines for were given and never met. Therefore Fox C-6 IS NOT in compliance as Superintendent Critchlow stated at the June 2013 board meeting. It seems that our district has a serious problem with being able to update its school board policies and regulations. It has now been 3 years since our district informed ED OCR that it would have completed the updates of board policies and regulations.
ED OCR is still waiting for board policy updates and changes to its manuals. ED OCR has been allowing the District to "voluntarily comply" for more than 4 years. The District has still not complied. Why not? Perhaps it is time for our school board to ask Superintendent Critchlow why the District under her leadership hasn't been able to meet the obligations of their May 1, 2009 Resolution Agreement with ED OCR.
It has also been nearly 3 years since District attorney Teri Goldman informed ED OCR that they should be completing the board policies and procedures updates by July 31, 2010. Taxpayer dollars are being spent by our District and ED OCR for failing to comply with the May 1, 2009 Resolution Agreement. Perhaps it's time for our school board to start looking for new leadership in our school district.
"We are in compliance with every complaint to date and one is in litigation and we cannot discuss it."If you read the Monitoring Letters issued by the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR) and the Final Agency Decision from the USDA using the links below, you will find that our Superintendent's statement was false.
Why would our Superintendent say that we cannot discuss these issues? Because it doesn't reflect well on her or the district. If Superintendent Critchlow is truly keeping our school board informed on these issues, I would think the board would want to know why it has taken our District more than 4 years to meet the obligations of the Resolution Agreement they signed with ED OCR in May of 2009. Our school board should also be asking why the District is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees rather than correcting their documentation and complying with the law.
I'm sure our Superintendent had no idea that ED OCR would find a lot more problems in our District than just not wanting to properly follow Section 504 law. If you read the ED OCR Monitoring Letters you will see that the majority of the problems are with the district's policies and handbooks and complying with Section 504, ADA and ADAAA. It seemed to be a systemic issue which is why the Washington D.C. Office for Civil Rights decided to conduct a District Wide Compliance Review. The District Wide Compliance Review was initiated in March of 2010. Of course, the District attorneys argued that ED OCR was basically picking on our District and harassing them. Needless to say, ED OCR denied their request to rescind the District Wide Compliance Review. However, the District has done a very good job of dragging things out while spending a lot in legal fees.
I think that we should discuss the fact that our District can't seem to accomplish what the they originally agreed to have done by August 31, 2009. By reading through the original Resolution Agreement and then the Monitoring Letters and attorney responses, you will find that the District informed the ED OCR that it would have the policies and procedures updated by July 31, 2010 after it didn't make the 2009 dates. Then in 2012 the District informed ED OCR that they planned on having the updated policies and procedures completed by July of 2012. Well, that didn't happen either! So, here we are in July of 2013 and the District still hasn't completed revising its documentation.
Now that the USDA Office for Civil Rights (USDA OCR) has asked the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for assistance in bringing Fox C-6 and Missouri DESE into compliance, it appears to demonstrates the fact that our school district and many like ours simply ignore the federal agencies. I think this is mostly due to the fact that ED OCR "allows" the District to "voluntarily comply". And, since ED OCR just issues new deadlines and doesn't actually perform and enforcement, the school district's ignore them. It will be interesting to see how much money our school board plans to allow our Superintendent to spend on these issues before they decide to comply with the rulings and fulfill their obligations to the Resolution Agreement.
Below you will find some of the documentation showing the District's lack of compliance. Our Superintendent has a tendency to just throw out statements thinking or hoping everyone believes her. I like to provide the evidence that shows that what she says isn't always true!
Letters from the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR) and the USDA OCR document the fact that our district is NOT in full compliance.
The complaints I spoke of at the June 2013 board meeting are not in litigation. Only the Department of Justice can litigate a complaint with the District. Currently the USDA is working with Missouri DESE hoping that they will bring our district into compliance with the USDA's Final Agency Decision. If MO DESE fails to do so, the DOJ will then step in to bring about compliance. At that time, the District may possibly end up in litigation. But, at the moment, these complaints are not in litigation. Superintendent Critchlow throws out the litigation claim to keep things behind "closed doors" rather than speaking about them in the public session of the board meetings.
Not to rule out any possibilities! But, perhaps Superintendent Critchlow is simply having a difficult time accepting the fact that the Monitoring Letters from ED OCR and the USDA Final Agency Decision aren't accolades for our District. If you're curious, give them a read and see what you think. How would someone would document this on their resume as an accomplishment?
Click on the links below to open the documents from ED OCR, USDA OCR and our school district attorneys to get an understanding of how compliant or non-compliant the Fox C-6 School District really is with these agencies. Our school district has certainly invested a lot of money in attorney's fees just to keep from filling out proper paperwork like 504 Plans for students in our District!
Documentation From Federal Agencies Contradicts
Superintendent's Statements
May 1, 2009 Fox C-6 School District Resolution Agreement with ED OCR
December 8, 2009 ED OCR Issues First Monitoring Letter to Fox C-6 for May 1, 2009 Resolution Agreement
February 26, 2010 Fox C-6 District Attorney Teri Goldman Response to ED OCR's December 2009 Monitoring Letter and Conference Call
March 11, 2010 ED OCR Complaint Notification to Fox C-6 Regarding Due Process Hearing Officer Selection
March 19, 2010 Fox C-6 District Wide Compliance Review Notification Letter from ED OCR
Due Process Hearing Officer Selection Concerns
Would you be concerned if you were going to have go through a Due Process Hearing against your school district and the school district gets to choose the Due Process Hearing Officer to hear the case? Would you be more concerned if the school district chose a Due Process Hearing Officer that was a former law associate of the school district Attorney representing the school district in the Due Process Hearing? How about if you found out that they co-represented school districts together at law firms against parents? Would you be concerned if you found out that the two attorneys were presenters at a convention answering questions on the rules of Due Process and discussing topics such as "Testifying in Due Process Hearings"?
Section 504 Procedural Safeguards typically state that the parent or the school district can request a Due Process Hearing to resolve disputes Section 504 decisions. The safeguards state that the school district will choose the Due Process Hearing Officer. The Due Process Hearing Officer is typically an attorney who acts like a judge to hear both parties on a matter and render a decision. A hearing officer is supposed to be "Fair and Impartial". A quick Google search of the hearing officer chosen by the District immediately raised red flags considering the hearing officer chosen by the District was Mr. John Brink who was a former law associate of District attorney Teri Goldman in two different law firms. The choice of hearing officer can easily sway the outcome of a hearing. I know they are supposed to be "Fair and Impartial". But, as proof of my concern, I found several cases where Mr. Brink and Ms. Goldman while working for the same law firms co-represented school districts on cases. What was more troubling was the fact that Mr. Brink and Ms. Goldman were listed together as presenters at the 2007 Missouri Speech Language Hearing Association (MSHA) convention speaking about the rules pertaining to Due Process with one of their topics listed as "Testifying in Due Process Hearings". This is why we filed a complaint regarding our concerns over the school district's choice of the Due Process Hearing Officer with ED OCR.
District attorney Teri Goldman responded to ED OCR investigating our concerns. In her response to ED OCR she stated, "Since 2002, Ms. Goldman occasionally sees Mr. Brink at professional conferences (perhaps 1-2 times per year) and does converse with him at such conferences. Beyond that, she has no personal relationship with him. Since 2002, Ms. Goldman and Mr. Brink have not served as co-presenters contrary to the Simpson's representation. Neither Ms. Goldman nor the District know the basis for the Simpson's assertion in that regard." That's why I submitted the convention schedule brochure PDF document from the 2007 MSHA conference to ED OCR documenting our concern along with a photo of Mr. Brink and Ms. Goldman seated together at the conference luncheon. These documents were found on the MSHA website along with the URL links. Shortly after ED OCR reviewed our complaint and responses from the District, Ms. Goldman and Mr. Brink, the documents were removed from the MSHA website where they had been posted for nearly 3 years. I found it odd that the documents disappeared so quickly after ED OCR investigated our concerns.
So, is Ms. Goldman's statement true about not serving as co-presenters with Mr. Brink? I kept a copy of the MSHA Convention brochure and photo from the luncheon just in case. The session description can be found on page 24 of the program schedule from the following link:
2007 Missouri Speech-Language Hearing Association (MSHA) Convention Schedule
Below is District attorney Teri Goldman's response to ED OCR regarding our concerns of the Due Process Hearing Officer selection. Mr. Dan Baker stated that he was originally concerned after I brought it to the attention of the District and ED OCR that Mr. Brink and Ms. Goldman were former law associates. However, after speaking with District attorney Teri Goldman and she assured Mr. Baker that Mr. Brink would be fair and impartial, Mr. Baker was no longer concerned about the choice of the hearing officer. Apparently, Mr. Baker didn't know that Ms. Goldman and Mr. Brink were former law associates during a January 2009 Due Process Hearing that Mr. Baker was involved in with another family at Fox that was decided in favor of the school district.
August 18, 2011 - Fox C-6 and MO DESE Found
Non-Compliant with Section 504, ADA and ADAAA
This ruling was handed down from the USDA after reviewing the Due Process Hearing that was put on by the District and heard by the District attorney's former law associate who was hired by the District as a Due Process Hearing Officer. The same attorney was hired by the District in January 2009 as a Due Process Hearing Officer for another case in the District and the hearing officer ruled in favor of the District on that case too. I wonder how truly "Fair and Impartial" former law associates are in hearing cases? You'll have to read the USDA's take on the Due Process Hearing Officer's decision.
August 18, 2011 USDA OCR Final Agency Decision Finding Fox C-6 and MO DESE Non-Compliant
August 18, 2011 USDA OCR Final Agency Decision Finding Fox C-6 and MO DESE Non-Compliant
March 13, 2012 - Fox C-6 Still Non-Compliant per ED OCR
ED OCR points out a lot of flaws in our District's student handbooks and school board policies that need to be updated. They also point out the fact that there are at least 7 different people identified in the District documentation as the District's 504 Coordinator on page 12. One of the persons listed hasn't worked for the District since 2008. I have to say that ED OCR is fairly thorough in their reading over of our District's Policies, Procedures and Student Handbooks.
March 13, 2012 ED OCR Monitoring Letter Update Sent to Fox C-6 Documenting Obligations Still Not Satisfied per the May 2009 Resolution Agreement
August 3, 2012 - Fox C-6 Still Non-Compliant per ED OCR
More of the same but with a little more detail of what needs to be corrected starting on page 10 of the document.
August 3, 2012 ED OCR Monitoring Letter Update Sent to Fox C-6 Documenting Obligations Still Not Satisfied per the May 2009 Resolution Agreement
April 25, 2013 - Fox C-6 Still Non-Compliant per ED OCR
The following April 25, 2013 ED OCR Monitoring Letter informed the Fox C-6 School District that it still has not met its obligations from the May 1, 2009 Resolution Agreement signed by Dan Baker. There have been 4 monitoring letters sent to the district since May 2009. Deadlines for were given and never met. Therefore Fox C-6 IS NOT in compliance as Superintendent Critchlow stated at the June 2013 board meeting. It seems that our district has a serious problem with being able to update its school board policies and regulations. It has now been 3 years since our district informed ED OCR that it would have completed the updates of board policies and regulations.
ED OCR is still waiting for board policy updates and changes to its manuals. ED OCR has been allowing the District to "voluntarily comply" for more than 4 years. The District has still not complied. Why not? Perhaps it is time for our school board to ask Superintendent Critchlow why the District under her leadership hasn't been able to meet the obligations of their May 1, 2009 Resolution Agreement with ED OCR.
It has also been nearly 3 years since District attorney Teri Goldman informed ED OCR that they should be completing the board policies and procedures updates by July 31, 2010. Taxpayer dollars are being spent by our District and ED OCR for failing to comply with the May 1, 2009 Resolution Agreement. Perhaps it's time for our school board to start looking for new leadership in our school district.
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
Petition | Create a law that protects children from bullying by teachers | Change.org
Petition | Create a law that protects children from bullying by teachers | Change.org
Hello!
I've started the petition "Government Body: Create a law that protects children from bullying by teachers" and need your help to get it off the ground.
Will you take 30 seconds to sign it right now? Here's the link:
http://www.change.org/petitions/government-body-create-a-law-that-protects-children-from-bullying-by-teachers
Here's why it's important:
It is essential that I children are safe from every kind of bullying and school remains a place to learn and not a place to fear.
You can sign my petition by clicking here.
Thanks!
Sherri Tucker
Hello!
I've started the petition "Government Body: Create a law that protects children from bullying by teachers" and need your help to get it off the ground.
Will you take 30 seconds to sign it right now? Here's the link:
http://www.change.org/petitions/government-body-create-a-law-that-protects-children-from-bullying-by-teachers
Here's why it's important:
It is essential that I children are safe from every kind of bullying and school remains a place to learn and not a place to fear.
You can sign my petition by clicking here.
Thanks!
Sherri Tucker
Assessment and Testing
Assessment and Testing
Resources for enriching your elementary child's education. Elementary school tips and tools for parents.
Educational Testing - Prepare Now for End of Year Tests
Annual educational testing is an important measure of your child's progress in both regular education and special education programs. It is never too early to begin preparing your child for annual educational testing. Learn about the important actions you can take now that will help your child get ready for annual educational testing.
Multiple Choice Testing
Did you know you can improve your test taking skills in more ways than studying alone? Learn easy strategies you can use to improved your performance on multiple choice testing.
Assessing Learning Disabilities - Learning Disability Assessment
Assessment of Learning Disabilities - Do you suspect your child has a learning disability? If so, diagnosis of the learning disability will require a full learning disability assessment. Learn about the assessment process in the diagnosis of learning disabilities in public schools.
Testing Accommodations – What are Testing Accommodations?
Learn about testing accommodations in special education programs or section 504 plans. Learn what test accommodations are, and understand various types of accommodations.
Focus on the Person First is Good Etiquette
The first step to building positive attitudes toward your child and his disability is using person first language. Learn about person first language, what it is, and how it can be used to promote focus on kids and not their disabilities.
Understanding Test Scores - Learn to Understand Test Scores
Understanding test scores is important for your child's success. Learn about the most common types of test scores used in special education programs and what they mean.
Refer Your Child for Assessment - Making Referral for Special Education Testing
If you suspect your child has a learning disability, learn how to begin the referral process and what it involves. Find out how to make a referral for your child.
What to Expect at the IEP Team Meeting - Understanding IEP Team Meetings
IEP Team meetings are an important part of your child's special education program. Learn what to expect during IEP team meetings and how you can actively participate in this important decision making process to strengthen your child's special education program.
Special Education Assessment
Testing helps the teacher and other IEP team members determine potential strengths and weaknesses, current performance levels, therefore provides insight for appropriate programming. Learn about the many types of assessments used in schools today.
Neuropsychological Assessment
Learn about neurological assessment as a tool for evaluating how their brain functioning may impact a child's learning.
Best Practices for Testing English Language Learners
Learn best practices for learning disabilities in students who are English language learners (ELL) or have English as a Second Language (ESL). Explore ways to determine appropriate testing methods and practices.
Ensuring an Appropriate Diagnosis - Tips for Accurate Assessment in Minorities
Disproportionate placement of minority children in special education programs is a growing concern in education. If you are the parent or teacher of a minority child who is being referred for special education, learn what you need to know to ensure that if a disability is diagnosed, it is appropriate for your child.
Assessment of Student Progress
Assessing students with learning disabilities can be a challenge. However, we must remember that assessing is providing the child with an opportunity to demonstrate knowledge, skill and understanding. For most learning disabled students, last on the list should be a 'pencil/paper' task. Below are a list of strategies that support and enhance assessment of learning disabled students.
Testing for English Language Learners and ESL Students
Find advice on general test taking strategies, information on specific exercises found on most standard English tests, and learn specific strategies for doing well on these types of exercises.
Standardized Tests - How to Help Your Child Prepare for Standardized Testing
Whether your child is in K-12 school or facing college entrance exams, standardized testing will play an important role in his educational future. For schools, standardized testing is an important part of accountability and effectiveness measures. Learn more about standardized testing and how you can help your child prepare.
Facts on Giftedness and LD - Characteristics and Assessment Issues
Students who are gifted and also have learning disabilities have complex educational needs. Learn more about these dually diagnosed students and common characteristics of the gifted and learning disabled.
Free Learning Styles Tests
Learn about yourself! Check out these learning style tests and self-assessment questionnaires, available free online.
Testing in the Homeschool Program
Explore thoughts on assessment in your homeschooling program.
Early Assessment of Seniors
Yale University researchers have developed a new assessment tool for health care practitioners that may help in their care of the elderly. The guided care protocol provides a standard approach for evaluating 13 clinical issues that have been shown to be common problems among the elderly, but that often go undiagnosed and untreated.
Test Taking Tips
Learn practical tips to help students be their best for their test day.
Testing Accommodations: What Does Your Child Need?
Learn what to consider when determining what types of testing accommodations your child may need.
Helping Your Child Prepare for Tests
Find strategies to help your child prepare for annual testing in school.
Learning Disability Test for Adults - Get a Learning Disability Test for Adults
Need a learning disability test for adults? Learn where to find a learning disability test for adults.
Learning Disability Tests – Tests Used to Diagnose a Learning Disability
Learn about the tests commonly used in diagnosing learning disabilities.
Learning Disabilities Assessment and Testing
Learn about the assessment and testing process used to diagnose learning disabilities. Learn how tests and assessments are used in schools to identify learning disabilities and develop programs. Assessment and testing to diagnose learning disabilities is a complex process. Learn what you need to know about assessment and testing for learning disabilities and special education programs.
Learning Enrichment for Elementary Aged ChildrenResources for enriching your elementary child's education. Elementary school tips and tools for parents.
Annual educational testing is an important measure of your child's progress in both regular education and special education programs. It is never too early to begin preparing your child for annual educational testing. Learn about the important actions you can take now that will help your child get ready for annual educational testing.
Multiple Choice Testing
Did you know you can improve your test taking skills in more ways than studying alone? Learn easy strategies you can use to improved your performance on multiple choice testing.
Assessing Learning Disabilities - Learning Disability Assessment
Assessment of Learning Disabilities - Do you suspect your child has a learning disability? If so, diagnosis of the learning disability will require a full learning disability assessment. Learn about the assessment process in the diagnosis of learning disabilities in public schools.
Testing Accommodations – What are Testing Accommodations?
Learn about testing accommodations in special education programs or section 504 plans. Learn what test accommodations are, and understand various types of accommodations.
Focus on the Person First is Good Etiquette
The first step to building positive attitudes toward your child and his disability is using person first language. Learn about person first language, what it is, and how it can be used to promote focus on kids and not their disabilities.
Understanding Test Scores - Learn to Understand Test Scores
Understanding test scores is important for your child's success. Learn about the most common types of test scores used in special education programs and what they mean.
Refer Your Child for Assessment - Making Referral for Special Education Testing
If you suspect your child has a learning disability, learn how to begin the referral process and what it involves. Find out how to make a referral for your child.
What to Expect at the IEP Team Meeting - Understanding IEP Team Meetings
IEP Team meetings are an important part of your child's special education program. Learn what to expect during IEP team meetings and how you can actively participate in this important decision making process to strengthen your child's special education program.
Testing helps the teacher and other IEP team members determine potential strengths and weaknesses, current performance levels, therefore provides insight for appropriate programming. Learn about the many types of assessments used in schools today.
Neuropsychological Assessment
Learn about neurological assessment as a tool for evaluating how their brain functioning may impact a child's learning.
Best Practices for Testing English Language Learners
Learn best practices for learning disabilities in students who are English language learners (ELL) or have English as a Second Language (ESL). Explore ways to determine appropriate testing methods and practices.
Ensuring an Appropriate Diagnosis - Tips for Accurate Assessment in Minorities
Disproportionate placement of minority children in special education programs is a growing concern in education. If you are the parent or teacher of a minority child who is being referred for special education, learn what you need to know to ensure that if a disability is diagnosed, it is appropriate for your child.
Assessment of Student Progress
Assessing students with learning disabilities can be a challenge. However, we must remember that assessing is providing the child with an opportunity to demonstrate knowledge, skill and understanding. For most learning disabled students, last on the list should be a 'pencil/paper' task. Below are a list of strategies that support and enhance assessment of learning disabled students.
Testing for English Language Learners and ESL Students
Find advice on general test taking strategies, information on specific exercises found on most standard English tests, and learn specific strategies for doing well on these types of exercises.
Standardized Tests - How to Help Your Child Prepare for Standardized Testing
Whether your child is in K-12 school or facing college entrance exams, standardized testing will play an important role in his educational future. For schools, standardized testing is an important part of accountability and effectiveness measures. Learn more about standardized testing and how you can help your child prepare.
Facts on Giftedness and LD - Characteristics and Assessment Issues
Students who are gifted and also have learning disabilities have complex educational needs. Learn more about these dually diagnosed students and common characteristics of the gifted and learning disabled.
Free Learning Styles Tests
Learn about yourself! Check out these learning style tests and self-assessment questionnaires, available free online.
Testing in the Homeschool Program
Explore thoughts on assessment in your homeschooling program.
Early Assessment of Seniors
Yale University researchers have developed a new assessment tool for health care practitioners that may help in their care of the elderly. The guided care protocol provides a standard approach for evaluating 13 clinical issues that have been shown to be common problems among the elderly, but that often go undiagnosed and untreated.
Test Taking Tips
Learn practical tips to help students be their best for their test day.
Testing Accommodations: What Does Your Child Need?
Learn what to consider when determining what types of testing accommodations your child may need.
Helping Your Child Prepare for Tests
Find strategies to help your child prepare for annual testing in school.
Learning Disability Test for Adults - Get a Learning Disability Test for Adults
Need a learning disability test for adults? Learn where to find a learning disability test for adults.
Learning Disability Tests – Tests Used to Diagnose a Learning Disability
Learn about the tests commonly used in diagnosing learning disabilities.
Jeff Grisamore Not: I Need The Help of Missouri Families
Jeff Grisamore Not: I Need The Help of Missouri Families
Missouri Families: I am preparing a petition for a bill similar to that in Kansas. I want Missouri children to be protected from bullying by their teachers. It happens far too often and it needs to stop. I need help from Missouri families. I need to get as many signatures as possible. We can't let this opportunity slip by. Missouri children deserve to be protected, too. "Studies show that bullying perpetrated by an adult, such as a teacher, can be even more harmful than bullying by a peer, quadrupling the child’s odds of suicidal thinking."
Missouri Families: I am preparing a petition for a bill similar to that in Kansas. I want Missouri children to be protected from bullying by their teachers. It happens far too often and it needs to stop. I need help from Missouri families. I need to get as many signatures as possible. We can't let this opportunity slip by. Missouri children deserve to be protected, too. "Studies show that bullying perpetrated by an adult, such as a teacher, can be even more harmful than bullying by a peer, quadrupling the child’s odds of suicidal thinking."
About Restraint & Seclusion | Stop Hurting Kids
About Restraint & Seclusion | Stop Hurting Kids
About Restraint & Seclusion
Students deserve to be treated with respect and dignity, and those with challenging behavior, which can include children with disabilities, should be treated with the same respect and dignity that everyone is entitled to. Yet students across the U.S. remain at risk of being subjected to traumatic, dangerous and dehumanizing procedures, referred collectively as restraint and seclusion, as a means of managing challenging behavior in school.
We encourage you to visit the resources section of this website for a deeper understanding of restraint and seclusion, and the wealth of information available on this subject. On this page we’ll provide an overview of restraint and seclusion, and why these practices should be eliminated from use in our schools.
Physical Restraint is a personal restriction that immobilizes or reduces the ability of a student to move his or her torso, arms, legs or head freely.
What this includes: face down or prone restraint, immobilizing a student by pinning arms and legs onto the ground, restricting breathing through restraint, holding a student in one’s lap with arms immobilized, pinning a student against the wall.
What it doesn’t include: physical restraint does not include a physical escort, such as touching or holding the hand or arm for the purpose of guiding a student to a safe location.
Mechanical Restraint is the use of a devise or equipment to restrict a student’s freedom of movement.
What this includes: taping a students arms and legs to a chair, strapping the student into a Rifton chair and specially constructed tables or desks from which the student cannot leave.
What it doesn’t include: mechanical restraint does not include orthopedically prescribed devices or mechanical supports that assist in balance or movement and are used for their original therapeutic intent, nor does it include vehicle safety straps or medical immobilization.
Seclusion is the involuntary confinement of a student alone in a room or area from which the student is physically prevented from leaving.
What this includes: placement in a dark isolated box, prolonged isolation without contact or bathroom breaks, locking a student in a closet or other tight space.
What it doesn’t include: seclusion is not a timeout, or an in-school suspension.
There is no evidence of the therapeutic or educational value of restraint and seclusion. They are practices that are neither ethical nor beneficial, and often cause a spiraling effect in which additional unwanted behaviors may arise. Further, there is an existing and growing body of evidence in support of positive alternatives in addressing challenging behaviors
We encourage you to visit the resources section of this website for a deeper understanding of restraint and seclusion, and the wealth of information available on this subject. On this page we’ll provide an overview of restraint and seclusion, and why these practices should be eliminated from use in our schools.
Defining Restraint and Seclusion
Restraint and seclusion are often unfamiliar terms unless you or a loved one have experienced or witnessed their use. In plain terms, they are techniques used to control or modify challenging behavior by force or isolation. Although we use the phrase “restraint and seclusion” to refer collectively to a set of abusive practices, the following offers more specific definitions and examples.Physical Restraint is a personal restriction that immobilizes or reduces the ability of a student to move his or her torso, arms, legs or head freely.
What this includes: face down or prone restraint, immobilizing a student by pinning arms and legs onto the ground, restricting breathing through restraint, holding a student in one’s lap with arms immobilized, pinning a student against the wall.
What it doesn’t include: physical restraint does not include a physical escort, such as touching or holding the hand or arm for the purpose of guiding a student to a safe location.
Mechanical Restraint is the use of a devise or equipment to restrict a student’s freedom of movement.
What this includes: taping a students arms and legs to a chair, strapping the student into a Rifton chair and specially constructed tables or desks from which the student cannot leave.
What it doesn’t include: mechanical restraint does not include orthopedically prescribed devices or mechanical supports that assist in balance or movement and are used for their original therapeutic intent, nor does it include vehicle safety straps or medical immobilization.
Seclusion is the involuntary confinement of a student alone in a room or area from which the student is physically prevented from leaving.
What this includes: placement in a dark isolated box, prolonged isolation without contact or bathroom breaks, locking a student in a closet or other tight space.
What it doesn’t include: seclusion is not a timeout, or an in-school suspension.
Why These Practices Should Be Stopped
Restraint and seclusion practices outside of an emergency context are widely recognized to be dangerous and dehumanizing for all involved. Numerous reports have shown that these practices can result in emotional and physical trauma, serious injury and even death.There is no evidence of the therapeutic or educational value of restraint and seclusion. They are practices that are neither ethical nor beneficial, and often cause a spiraling effect in which additional unwanted behaviors may arise. Further, there is an existing and growing body of evidence in support of positive alternatives in addressing challenging behaviors
ADHD School Accommodations – Documentation Tips
ADHD School Accommodations – Documentation Tips
Keep a journal. Document all informal communication with your school system about accommodations for your ADHD child, including detailed notes of IEP meetings and phone calls.
Make copies. Use separate binders to store copies of daily notes written to and sent from any teacher, as well as for all classwork, homework, and tests that are sent home, especially anything you had to sign and return. Make weekly copies of your child's daily planner or communication notebook.
Follow up in writing. Requests for ADHD school accommodations should be sent in formal, signed letters or e-mails. Follow up every phone call and meeting with a written narrative. Document exactly what was said, by whom, and when regarding your child's IEP and/or 504 Plan.
Be professional. Be courteous and businesslike when writing to a professional at school. Think through what you want to say.
Stick to the facts. Keep your letter and e-mails short and to the point. When speaking with teachers, use index cards or notes to maintain focus.
Be fair. When writing to a teacher or school administrator, praise any positive aspects of your child's educational experience to lend validity to your concerns about the negative aspects.
Get formal confirmation receipts. Send every letter, document, and request three ways (return receipt post, e-mail, and fax). Staple the confirmation receipts to your copy of the original.
Keep a journal. Document all informal communication with your school system about accommodations for your ADHD child, including detailed notes of IEP meetings and phone calls.
Make copies. Use separate binders to store copies of daily notes written to and sent from any teacher, as well as for all classwork, homework, and tests that are sent home, especially anything you had to sign and return. Make weekly copies of your child's daily planner or communication notebook.
Follow up in writing. Requests for ADHD school accommodations should be sent in formal, signed letters or e-mails. Follow up every phone call and meeting with a written narrative. Document exactly what was said, by whom, and when regarding your child's IEP and/or 504 Plan.
Be professional. Be courteous and businesslike when writing to a professional at school. Think through what you want to say.
Stick to the facts. Keep your letter and e-mails short and to the point. When speaking with teachers, use index cards or notes to maintain focus.
Be fair. When writing to a teacher or school administrator, praise any positive aspects of your child's educational experience to lend validity to your concerns about the negative aspects.
Get formal confirmation receipts. Send every letter, document, and request three ways (return receipt post, e-mail, and fax). Staple the confirmation receipts to your copy of the original.
Claim your free digital copy of Creating An IEP for Your ADHD Child:
11 action steps and 40 great accommodations for children with attention deficit. DOWNLOAD your free copy and receive e-mail updates with school success strategies for children with ADHD.
11 action steps and 40 great accommodations for children with attention deficit. DOWNLOAD your free copy and receive e-mail updates with school success strategies for children with ADHD.
Overcoming Discrimination
Here's an article about overcoming discrimination of those who are different.
Hope this is helpful.
Dan
NOTE TO EDITORS: (We're distributing this article at no charge for use in your websites, newsletters, magazines, and other communications except books -- provided you run the article unedited and unchanged, including the About the Author and copyright information. Books require separate permission. If you have any questions, please contact Dan Coulter at dan@coultervideo.com or 336-608-4224.)
ARTICLE:
OVERCOMING DISCRIMINATION
by Dan Coulter
I got an arresting perspective about discrimination at my high school reunion last week. A classmate and I were sitting at a table away from the crowd, catching up on the years since graduation. He talked about raising a niece with a physical disability and said, “I thought being black was tough, but that doesn't come close to the discrimination I see against people with disabilities. Sometimes they aren't even treated like people.”
That meant a lot coming from an African American man who is old enough to remember the day Martin Luther King was assassinated.
We went to school at Central High, the oldest of the four high schools operating in Springfield, Missouri at the time. Most of the black kids in town lived in neighborhoods in our district. I heard about rumors from other high schools that Central was a rough school and we routinely had fights in the halls. When the city redrew the school district boundaries around population shifts, some parents moved rather that have their kids transfer to Central.
Which was a shame. Their kids missed out on a great experience. The rumors were nonsense, and having black and white kids attending school together was the absolute best way to combat discrimination. We got to see that people are people. I had an outstanding senior class. My classmates with all different shades of skin went on to do extraordinary things in Springfield and across the country. We have business executives, educators, doctors, lawyers, scientists, musicians, military commanders, and more. Many of my black classmates had to overcome racial discrimination to succeed.
It struck me when my classmate, who has an inspiring story of his own, made such a strong point about discrimination faced by people with disabilities.
During my life, one of the main factors I've seen in reducing racial discrimination has been proximity. Just like the parents who didn't want their kids going to Central, it's easy to make false assumptions when you don't have first hand experience. Proximity can change that. In my first jobs after college, I saw employees who were initially suspicious of black people hired into their groups gradually change their minds as they worked side by side as equals. They saw “different” people weren't that different. The real cross-over point came when blacks and whites became friends and started socializing off the job.
Proximity can be an important tool in dealing with prejudice against individuals with Asperger Syndrome and autism. Many people have the same kind of misconceptions about those on the autism spectrum that they've traditionally held against people of other races, or people who speak a different language, or people who have a physical disability. They can't understand a job well enough to do it. They won't get along with co-workers. They won't be dependable.
Maybe it's rooted in basic fears of people who are different.
But that just means we have to opportunity to help people see past those differences and false assumptions. To help them understand that getting to know people who are different can reveal their talents and abilities. To realize they can be valued friends and dependable, productive workers. I've interviewed supervisors who assessed their employees on the autism spectrum as being more dependable and productive than their typical coworkers. Some have special talents and succeed in highly skilled positions.
We need more education in schools to help students understand and accept classmates who are different. We need opportunities for all students to show their talents and abilities. We need positive, supervised ways for students with physical and mental challenges to interact with general student populations. Every time I hear a story about a student body actively supporting a student with a disability, I think: there are opportunities for those stories in every school in the country.
I was encouraged recently to see the software company SAP announce it would actively recruit people with autism to be employees. I hope we can all seek out stories about people with challenges who are succeeding and share them with news media outlets. These stories encourage more employers to hire people who don't fit typical stereotypes. And they can inspire people who are different to overcome rejection and keep applying.
I got an early lesson in dealing with discrimination when my grandfather was visiting my home. My father's father was a prejudiced old guy, and used a variation of the “N” word, calling black people, “Nuggins.” My sweet, gentle, accommodating mother heard him make that reference in front of me and my brother. She gently admonished, “We don't use that kind of language in this house, Grandpa.” Grandpa took offense, and left in a huff.
But my mother didn't back down. She knew what was right.
My high school classmate and his niece know what's right.
When we look past our differences to see what what really matters, we all do.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR – Dan Coulter is the producer of the Intricate Minds series of DVDs that help students understand classmates with Asperger Syndrome, autism, and other differences. You can find more articles and information on his website: coultervideo.com.
Copyright 2013 Dan Coulter Used by Permission All Rights Reserved
If you'd like to comment on this article, link to it, or like it on Facebook, you can find it at: http://coultervideo.com/content/overcoming-discrimination
(If you want to add an email address to the list receiving articles from Dan Coulter, please send an email to articles@coultervideo.com with "subscribe" in the subject field. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, please send an email to articles@coultervideo.com with "unsubscribe" in the subject field. Please use this email address only to subscribe or unsubscribe, and send correspondence to dan@coultervideo.com.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)