Again and again, we hear the same story: charters excluding children with special needs. This is contrary to federal law. How do they get away with it? Where are the lawyers?
A mother writes:
My daughter is a mainstream student and has been attending Minnesota School of Science since they opened. For 2 years in a row I have been trying to enroll my son who is a special needs student but have been told by the school both years not to enroll him because the special education program is lacking and that my son’s needs will not get met and was told he is better off in a Minneapolis Public school not a charter school. This came straight from the mouth of the principal and two special needs teachers. I am glad they were honest enough to warn me that their special needs program sucks, but what does that mean for the children already enrolled? That their needs are not being met and that they are being under educated?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Perhaps the mother in question didn’t notice what was going on in the school over the last couple of years, but it’s not new: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/01/minnesota-school-of-scien_n_1729305.html
The Minnesota School of Science looks like another ‘public’ charter school that likes to rid itself of special needs students who don’t score well on standardized tests. How absolutely democratic of them.
You have to find someone willing to turn their lives upside down to pursue a lawsuit to get their kids into a school which isn’t interested in actually meeting the needs of their child. People want to get on with their lives. We need a class action, I guess.
AMEN!!!! The abandonment of these students came with the Inclusion classroom before readiness which was really about getting these students to be the nail in the coffin of public education by including them in tests for measurement (no matter how it tortured the students and misguided the interpretation of results) and cried failure of teachers. A political and corporate contrivance of mega deceit by anyone who has taken part in this travesty!!!!! Cleaver but evil!!!
DO NO HARM!!!!!!!!!
The district (authorizer) has notified the school that it will be closed for a variety of reasons.
Public schools should be open to all.
I keep waiting for people in this discussion group to ask how it’s possible for the elite district magnet schools found all over the country to screen out kids with special needs who can’t pass their tests.
Some districts collaborate to provide services to some students with special needs – such as programs for students who are deaf, or blind or other forms of disability – so I can see how a school could say that a better program is available elsewhere. I know this happens in New York through BOCES (Board of Cooperative services) and it happens in Minnesota through what used to be called ECSU’s (Educational Cooperative Service Units). I think these cooperative units have various names.
Here’s a link to a cooperative group in Connecticut that operates both magnet schools and schools for students with various forms of disabilities. It’s run by a group of about 20 districts
http://www.aces.org/our-schools/
But explicitly screening out students on the basis of tests or auditions seems wrong.
“But explicitly screening out students on the basis of tests or auditions seems wrong.”
For once Joe, I totally agree with your statement other than I would substitute “is” for “seems”.
Okay, TE, time to chime in-ha ha!!
The only thing I have to add is that the folks commenting in the thread about AP classes are lamenting that students not of AP caliber are now taking the classes. Is it ok to screen students out of classes based on past performance, auditions, or test scores, standardized or not?
AP classes are just another marketing device for the College Board. I have been “certified” to teach AP Spanish (an eight hour/day five day a week graduate level course-three credit hours strictly in how to teach to the test. I was appalled at the time and still am) but refuse to teach it. I actively discourage kids from taking the AP test-why waste their money.
TE, you are correct in question the various sorting and separating educational malpractices that occur on a daily basis in most, if not all public schools, whether it is select admission, select classes, etc. . . . However, I don’t necessarily agree with you on your category of “location” selection as that selection is done by the parents prior to the child entering a district. Is it right that different locations have such vast differences in facilities, offerings, etc. . . ? NO! But again it is not the schools that are doing the choosing here. But “choice” is the mantra of economists these days, eh!
Have you read: The Perils of Economic Thinking about Human Behavior by Bruce Baker? If not it’s found at: http://schoolfinance101.wordpress.com/2013/04/20/the-perils-of-economic-thinking-about-human-behavior/ . If so, what do you think?
For my university you are right that Spanish AP does little good. If a student comes in with four years of Spanish and pass the fourth semester university class, we give credit to the student for the first three semesters.
For other disciplines, AP is the usual way for students to get credit for work in high school. Our most capable students will come in with sophomore or higher standing in terms of credit hours.
TE,
Have you read the above referenced study? If so your thoughts, please.
Here is a reference to a piece by the Newark Education Law Center on the low number of English Language Learners in Charter Schools. I think there needs to be more data to support the argument that Charter Schools find indirect ways to keep the numbers of ELLs and Special Needs Students down because of testing. When a principal tells a parent not to apply, there is not proof. However, perhaps if enough stories are collected, we a study using qualitative interview data might get some attention.
http://www.edlawcenter.org/news/archives/bullying-and-residence/elc-presses-njdoe-on-bilingual-education-in-charter-schools.html
I agree that if charters are to be considered public schools as they insist, they need to accept any and all students. However, the demand that they accept students with special needs seems to me to only feed into the controversy over whether or not they actually produce better scores on standardized tests than public schools. The argument is made that their scores only look better because they avoid the most difficult to teach students. This is beside the point. As a retired teacher of the deaf, I would prefer to see a deaf student in a program with the full resources to meet that student’s needs. Besides needing a peer group and teachers and staff who can effectively communicate with the student, there would be a need for other professional staff knowledgeable about the needs of deaf students, including speech/language therapist, occupational therapist, school psychologist, etc. In my opinion, the likelihood that these many needs could be accommodated in a charter school is very low.
Sheila, thanks for your insights. Parents of students who are deaf or hard of hearing in the Minneapolis St. Paul area have the following options:
a. A statewide, publicly funded residential school about an hour south of Minneapolis/St. Paul
b. A program run by the ST. Paul Public Schools
c. A k-12 charter started by parents of students who are deaf/hard of hearing
d. Sending their youngster to other district or charter public schools.
There may be other options but I know these exist. This gives families the ability to choose among different settings, with somewhat different philosophies.
No one that I know of asserts that any of these is “the best” for all students who are deaf or hard of hearing.
There needs to be a continuum of choices. Parents need to be fully informed about all of the choices, and the decision made based on which program is in the best interests of each student on an individual basis. That said, the voice of the deaf community needs to be included. Parents who have no previous knowledge of deafness and its effects need to learn about it from adults in the deaf community as well as from audiologists, speech therapists, and special ed directors.
Agreed. And as parents of deaf students have made clear, not all professionals agree. This is one of the reasons some parents started an elementary and a secondary charter focusing on kids who were deaf or hard of hearing. They had been frustrated by disinterest of some professionals in a public school that focused on American Sign Language.
Just to make sure it’s understood–state schools for the deaf are public schools.
Not in Pennsylvania,. There they are charter schools.
I wasn’t aware of that. The RI School for the Deaf where I taught is a public school. It was declared a Persistently Lowest Achieving School by the RI Dept. of Ed. based on standardized test scores and was almost turned over to a management organization, but the Board of Trustees chose the Transformation option. Unjustifiable stress on the students, teachers, staff, families, and community. Not that the school didn’t have need for improvement, but that improvement cannot be measured by mass administered standardized tests with validity for this population of students.
Here’s another doozy of an article addressing the discipline issues and treatment of SPED students by CT’s largest and most aggressive charter management organization, Achievement First:
http://www.ctmirror.org/story/state-education-board-review-achievement-firsts-discipline-policies
It’s increasingly clear that our policy makers are selling out traditional public schools and then failing to administer proper oversight of the privately run charters. Somehow we’ve got to convince parents not to enroll their children in these schools in the first place, but rather to get actively involved in working to improve the public schools from which they’re fleeing. Otherwise they leave most of their children’s ordinary due process rights and other legal protections at the charter-school door. (And the same goes for teachers’ due process rights.)
But Teach For America happily places it’s “highly trained” teachers to work as special ed teachers, which I suppose also helps circumvent this issue. Notice how the principal skirted the issue by talking to the lack of quality. It is legally offered but who in the world would ever want special needs children to be taught by someone who lacks professional training in this field?
Minnesota School of Science is being removed from its current building, which was Cityview K-8, but is still being authorized by MPS. There have been two years of testing irregularities which are under investigation by the MN Department of Education. The district is reopening the Cityview school as a “partnership” school. A partnership school is autonomous in the since that they have longer school days, teachers are on call for parents, and the curriculum can be decided by the school and not the district’s Focused Instruction units. There is a lot of privatization of the public schools on the near Northside, which is predominantly black, Latino, and Asian students. There is no collaboration with the community because this is an area in which they can do what they want because the parents don’t have voices. Yet, on the Southwest side of Minneapolis the district wouldn’t dare open charters or place TFA pseudo teachers in the schools because the parents would have an uprising. Their voices are heard because it is predominantly upper middle class white students attending those schools. It is a travesty what is happening in Minneapolis! The Broad Foundation play book on how to privatize public education is in full effect. Our central offices are filled with TFA and Vista workers. It looks like a corporate youth fest of young white kids who don’t know anything about the community they are working in and changing for the worse. The current mayoral candidates with the exception of one are all for what is going on. One of them, Don Samuels, has stated in the past that a high school should be blown up. His wife is in charge of Northside Achievement Zone which is supposed to serve families in need, but when a single father approached them because he was being kicked out from his living space with his three daughters he was told that he would be placed on a waiting list. The funds from this program should primarily go towards the families in need not the hiring of a huge staff. We call this “poverty pimping”. This mayoral candidate is an immigrant from Jamaica. He lives in the community but is all for the gentrification of the community. He does not believe in public education. He had to pay for his in Jamaica; therefore, the mindset that education shouldn’t be a right but a privilege for the haves and not the have nots.
There are all kinds of peculiarities when it comes to choice and special education. A public school can be selective in admitting out-of-district tuition students but must accept any and all students who reside within its boundaries and provide a free and appropriate education for them. It therefore stands to reason that a “boundary-less” publicly funded charter could behave in the same fashion. This is one of the inherent flaws with boundary-less charters: they can behave like selective private schools thereby leave the neediest students to be educated in the public schools where they reside.
Sorry, but
* there are many district magnet schools that explicitly screen out students who live in their community. I’ve posted links to district magnet schools all over the country that do this. It’s factually incorrect that every district public school is open to all kinds of students.
* There are many charter public schools that eagerly serve all kinds of students. There are some in New Orleans that have admissions tests which I think is unfortunate. An article appeared earlier this year documenting several other charters that have admissions tests.
Most state charter laws explicitly prohibit charters from using admissions tests.
Joe, I’d like to read your response to this expose written by Reuters:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/15/us-usa-charters-admissions-idUSBRE91E0HF20130215
Special Report: Class Struggle – How Charter Schools Get the Students They Want
“Charters are public schools, funded by taxpayers and widely promoted as open to all. But Reuters has found that across the United States, charters aggressively screen student applicants, assessing their academic records, parental support, disciplinary history, motivation, special needs and even their citizenship, sometimes in violation of state and federal law.”
It seems that the ideal is to accept all interested families but the reality is far different.
“Open access “is an easy and popular talking point,” said Frederick Hess, director of education policy studies at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. There’s just one problem, Hess said: It’s not true.
“There’s a level of institutional hypocrisy here which is actually unhealthy,” said Hess, who is a strong advocate of charter schools. “It’s a strange double game. Charter advocates say, ‘No, no, no, we don’t believe in (selective admissions),’ but when you see a successful charter school, it’s filled with families who are a good fit and who want to be there, and that’s not possible when you have a random assortment of kids.””
There are some charters that are following the rules. Others are not. We’ve helped close some that are not following the rules. More than are not following rules should be closed.
The National Charter School Authorizers is working in a number of states to get schools closed that are not following rules.
What is your reaction to the many magnet schools that explicitly use admissions tests to screen out students?
You underscored my point (which I didn’t make too clearly). Since a magnet school has no boundaries it can behave like a private school. If a school has specific attendance boundaries, all children who reside within that boundary are entitled to FAPE and the school is required to provide FAPE to that child. The pure market theory that some charter adherents promote is this: if all public schools closed, “Mr. Market” would EVENTUALLY make sure that charter schools emerge to meet the niche needs of students the same way, say, grocery stores or restaurants are opened when there is sufficient demand.
Most magnet schools do have boundaries. They might serve a section of a city, they might serve an entire city (or school district). or they might serve students from several districts.
My point is that many of them use admissions tests to screen out student. We heard yesterday from a person in NY that this was ok with him.
But many people here have opposed what they assert are charters use of admissions tests (which I agree, is happening in some places) while not having a problem with magnet schools using admissions tests.
Joe, in my state and district (FL) magnet schools are largely a fad that had passed. My current school was a magnet school for technology 10 years ago. When the magnet craze struck this district there were several options and all were open to any student who chose a program, whether in technology, the arts, STEM fields, etc. There were no entry exams here.
Several school boards and superintendents later the magnet designations were dropped in the district, mostly due to NCLB and Florida’s failed Reading First initiative.
The one magnet school that remains just voted to leave the district and become a charter in order to protect their programs from budget cuts and loss of staff. The parents at this school raise enormous amounts of money to support their program and they are moving towards a private school mentality and operation it seems.
Our newly hired superintendent seems to favor standardization across all schools in curriculum and teaching so no more IB schools, no more magnets. Everyone will be CCSS, data driven, tested and rewarded or fired from what I can tell.
Your mileage may vary, of course. I was never comfortable with the magnet high schools programs in NYC when I lived and taught there. I always believed that my kids from my Title I school deserved the same opportunities, resources, and curriculum that were available at the competitive schools instead of being herded into the overcrowded, underfunded, and downright dangerous neighborhood high school. Most just dropped out anyway.
I also understood that these schools were holdovers, relics if you will, of a very different system that also offered vocational schools and highly specialized options so each student could get the education that suited their career goals.
The vast majority of these schools lost political favor and funding and died out but the parents and alumni kept the high performing schools going, as they still do. The reforms and the charter movement, along with mayoral control, did little to nothing to change this stratified system and I doubt they ever will. Why can’t all NYC high schools be run like Stuyvesant or Bronx Science or the School for Performing Arts?
Chris, thanks for your note. We agree that there should not be two, three or four “classes” of schools, whether district or charter. But the federal Magnet schools program is still very active. For example:
http://www2.ed.gov/programs/magnet/funding.html
$99,800,000 available from USDE
https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/department-awards-100-million-magnet-school-grants
Hmmm. Maybe my school should look into becoming a Montessori Magnet school, LOL. Problem is that the state and district will not continue funding federal programs here once the grant runs its course. I see that the USDOE is anticipating making 41 awards this year for magnet schools. Out of over 99,000 public schools that is hardly indicative of a national movement, especially compared to the billions poured into charter schools while the public schools go begging. I still oppose the idea of selective public schools of whatever stripe, however, whether magnet or charter,
There are at least 2 reasons why a charter could reject a student with special needs. One is because the school wouldn’t want to look bad on state tests, and a second is because the school can’t provide a good education because there aren’t adequate supports/resources at that school. I think it’s important that we wisely respect that not all schools can educate all students, and attempt to tell the difference between the reasons why a child might be accepted.
Here’s an example but without using charters – not all elementary schools in a district are set up to provide all kinds of special education support. As such, a child with Autism should be enrolled at any school of the parent’s choosing without consideration of whether there were appropriate supports in place at that school.
Fair does not equal same – we should stop expecting charters to treat all students the same regardless of disability status or educational need, because those students do not have the same needs. Treating all students the same (e.g., accepting any student regardless of ability to meet the child’s needs) is exactly the opposite of fair.
While I agree with your premise the reality is that, at least in the 3 school districts I’ve worked in (in 3 different states) is that the public schools are required to provide the services and transportation to meet the child’s needs. If the neighborhood school doesn’t offer the needed services then the schools are required to bus the child to a school that does offer the services. Charters are exempt from that requirement.
If “we should stop expecting charters to to treat all students the same ” then we should also stop allowing charters and their advocates to make the claim that they do so, right? Honesty is certainly the best policy in all regards when it comes to educating children.
In this Special Report by Reuters, published this past February, there is this statement:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/15/us-usa-charters-admissions-idUSBRE91E0HF20130215
“Charter advocates say it’s a fair fight because both types of schools are free and open to all. “That’s a bedrock principle of our movement,” said Jed Wallace, president of the California Charter Schools Association.”
Yet the same report documents such gatekeeping as this:
“In California, the law sounds straightforward enough: “A charter school shall admit all pupils who wish to attend the school,” with seats awarded by lottery if demand exceeds capacity.
Yet Roseland Accelerated Middle School, a charter school in Santa Rosa, California, won’t even enter applicants into the lottery until they have proved their mettle by writing a five-page autobiography (with no errors in grammar or spelling, the form warns), as well as a long essay and six short essays. Applicants also must provide recommendations, report cards and statements from their parents or guardians and submit a medical history, including a list of all medications they take.
Gail Ahlas, superintendent of the public school district that oversees the charter, says the process isn’t meant to exclude anyone, but to “set the tone” for the school as a rigorous college-prep environment. The form does not offer any accommodation for students with special needs or limited English skills, but Ahlas said she is confident the process “has not been a gatekeeper” and “absolutely” complies with state law.
Ahlas is hardly alone in interpreting California law as flexible. One charter high school in the state will not consider applicants with less than a 2.0 grade point average. Another will only admit students who passed Algebra I in middle school with a grade of B or better.
Julie Russell, who runs the state’s Charter Schools Division, said she is not sure how, or whether, such policies square with the open-admissions law. “It’s not real, real clear,” she said. She relies on each school’s overseer to make sure it is in compliance, she said.
In California, as in most states, oversight of charter schools primarily rests with local “authorizers” – typically a school district, a university, or a community group. Authorizers review policies, monitor academic progress and make sure the schools under their jurisdiction comply with state and federal law.
The National Association of Charter School Authorizers informs members that one of their core responsibilities is making sure schools are open to all, said Alex Medler, a vice president of the group. “That’s non-negotiable,” he said.”
Fairness works both ways. Let’s advocate for fairness to both public schools and charter schools and honesty about all programs.
I definitely agree with you Chris. Charter schools should most certainly be required to be honest about who they are serving.
“Accepting all students” does not equal “treating all students the same”.
Many charters do this, though in a much more subtle manner. This is why these charters are able to get more money into the classroom, and outperform their regular public school counterparts. It’s a no-brainer.
If charters do not have to take special needs students, they cannot be compared to schools that do.
Definitely agreed that we shouldn’t compare apples with oranges.
When it comes to charters and special education, as long as a charter operator is a part of a larger district, the school CAN recommend that students with certain types of disabilities move to a different location. This practice, unfortunately, is legal. Just as not all neighborhood schools offer cluster programs, i.e. self-contained classrooms, autism, deaf/hard of hearing, emotional/behavioral, etc. so too charters are not required to offer all types of services as long as these free and appropriate services are offered somewhere in the district. Charters that are considered their own district, however, ARE responsible for meeting the needs of ANY student that applies.
I believe the real problem lies in funding/transparency. If charters choose to exclude, they should get less funding (including all the tax breaks, real estate deals, etc), and that choice to exclude should be stated clearly when comparing schools. Importantly, schools should never be compared simply by percentage of students “with disabilities” because it is the degree of disability that matters. I work closely with many schools in Chicago, and without exception, all the current charter student with IEPs have mild disabilities that can be accommodated with minimal support/services. It is the neighborhood schools that have high concentrations of students with significant emotional/behavioral disorders, learning problems, cognitive disabilities, autism, mental health disorders, etc. This clumping of certain students affects the climate of the school, the needs in terms of resources/class sizes/school utilization numbers, and of course, the “average” test scores. If our education system is going to insist on “accountability”, it is absolutely absurd to compare schools with many students with significant special needs to schools servicing very few. I would argue that this phenomenon alone explains most of the supposed charter success stories.
Right now, it is legal to build a two-tiered system with charters (as well as selective enrollment/magnet/IB etc) on one side and the neighborhood schools on the other. I believe laws need to be changed to clearly not allow this type of stratification because students being concentrated in neighborhood schools are experiencing an undue hardship due to being segregated from higher-performing peers. In addition, funding laws must be changed to guarantee that the schools servicing the highest-needs students are getting sufficient and equitable resources. This means differentiating levels of poverty and types of disability. In Chicago, budgets in neighborhood schools are shrinking (not related to enrollment) while charters’ budgets are growing. This type of agenda-based budgeting is severely damaging to students with the highest needs. We are also seeing schools with high numbers of students with IEPs having their schools closed. Again, this represents disparate impact on students with disabilities.
Lastly, no uncertified novice teacher should EVER be allowed to teach special education students without first completing a full, quality teacher preparation program. If districts are finding it difficult to keep these positions filled (there are plenty of Sped teachers-usually-but the extremely poor working conditions make turnover an even bigger problem than in General Education) then districts should be forced to change the positions into more manageable workloads. Districts should not be given the option of the alt cert/TFA quick-fix which significantly disadvantages children with special needs.
At the end of the day, we should focus on giving EVERY school what they need, and stop focusing on ranking schools as if the children and their needs are all the same. I think it’s disgusting to choose to exclude children with disabilities or behavior problems just to have better marketing spin. In the age of accountability, children who struggle are liabilities. And charters are legally allowed to dump these kids and claim success. I say charters are ethical failures.
Very well stated.
Katie, Chicago had a well developed system of exclusive magnets before charters came along. I agree that a school like Whitney Young in Chicago should not be compared with a neighborhood school with no admissons tests.
Apparently in Chicago, you have to have a high test score just to be allowed to take the 3 hour test that determines whether you score high enough to get into a selective secondary magnet school:
Info about selective Chicago district elementary schools”
http://www.cpsoae.org/apps/pages/index.jsp?uREC_ID=72695&type=d
“Gifted Programs consist of regional gifted centers, regional gifted centers for English-language learners, classical schools, academic centers, and international gifted programs. Testing is required in order to be considered for acceptance into these schools.”
http://www.cpsoae.org/apps/pages/index.jsp?uREC_ID=72695&type=d&termREC_ID=&pREC_ID=142588
The application score consists of the following areas; each is worth 33 1/3 of the total point score, or a maximum of 300 points each:
1. The entrance exam
2. Previous year’s reading comprehension and total math test results
3. Previous year’s reading, math, science and social studies grades
The point system rubric for Academic Centers and the International Gifted Program can be accessed via the link below.
Info about selective Chicago (district) secondary magnet schools:
http://www.cpsoae.org/apps/pages/index.jsp?uREC_ID=72696&type=d
Since the Selective Enrollment High Schools are so competitive, applicants should explore all available resources before deciding where to apply.
http://www.cpsoae.org/apps/pages/index.jsp?uREC_ID=72696&type=d&termREC_ID=&pREC_ID=121765
APPLICATION QUESTIONS
Do I have to apply for the maximum number of schools?
No. You should apply only to those schools where you would accept an offer if your child receives one.
I want to apply to more schools. Can I submit a second application?
No. You may not apply to more than six Selective Enrollment High Schools and four Military Academies. You may not submit a second application in order to apply to additional schools.
My child is currently enrolled in high school. I would like for him to transfer to a Selective Enrollment High School next year. What should I do?
Contact the high school in which you are interested for information on transfer opportunities and guidelines. Each school establishes its own guidelines and requirements for transfer students.
TESTING QUESTIONS
How do I have my child tested for the Selective Enrollment High Schools exam?
The first step is to apply. In order to be tested, students must pre-qualify, based on their standardized test scores from the 2011-2012 school year. After the applications are processed, eligible students will be contacted by mail regarding testing date, time, and location. If your child is not eligible to test, you will receive a letter notifying you of this information.
What are the requirements for students to qualify for the admissions exam?
Testing eligibility for the Selective Enrollment High Schools admissions exam is based on the student’s 2011-2012 ISAT national percentile rank in reading and math or, if the student did not take the ISAT, the 2011-2012 percentile rank in reading and math on a different nationally normed, standardized achievement test. In order to be eligible for testing, students must have a minimum stanine of 5 in reading comprehension and a minimum stanine of 5 in total math. Students with an IEP or 504 Plan must have stanines in reading comprehension and total math that total at least 10 (e.g., 3 in reading, 7 in math; 9 in reading, 1 in math).
How long is the test?
The Selective Enrollment High Schools exam is approximately three hours long.
In California we have the proof of the lack of special ed in charter schools especially the moderate to highly effected students. Charter schools do not have to follow most ed code and/or local regulations, cherry pick students and parents, do not deal with behavioral problems, ESL and special ed. To compare two different systems there must be a correction factor to allow for the differences. Charter schools really do not do well when the correction factor is applied so that you can look at them straight up. charter schools are all about special and elite not public or for all.
Katie, you are correct about SPED placement options. Schools are permitted to recommend a range of placement options provided that 1. the placement outside of the neighborhoos school is necessary to meet the child’s individualized goals & objectives on the IEP, and 2. everyone in the IEP team meeting agrees to the placement change. If parents do not agree to a placement change than they have the legal rights to challenge the decision in due process hearings in a court. The Supreme Court has ruled in the child’s favor on many significant SPED cases that began with parents challenging an IEP in due process since the 1960’s and 70’s.
Unfortunately, the fact that the labor dept & a federal court both ruled that Charters are considered private schools opened a legal loophole that serves Charter operators interests, not the child’s interests. Only public schools are obligated to provide children the rights & protections outlined IDEA. It is illegal for a public school to refuse to provide services (transportation is a service) on the IEP for ANY reason. Insufficient staff, not enough resources, no money- all illegal. Period. As private schools, charters are legally free to exclude and discriminate children at will, for any reason.
Charters with the help of a court, DoEd, and the Labor Dept have assured a neat and tidy little deal for themselves by taking public money but operating as a private entity. The marketing that Charters give parents choice is so deceptive it’s sickening. Particularly heart-wrenching to those of us in special education is watching 40 years of fighting to gain civil rights protections for our children being chipped away a little at a time. I’ve never seen a federal DoEd work to diminish protections for kids with disabilities like Duncan’s in my 40 years in the field.
Very good point. The not-so-public/private blur of charters places them in a legal limbo, and it is children with disabilties that are hurt the most. “Choice” is more about schools choosing what “kind” of kid they want, not parents, leaving all the unwanted ones in the good old-fashioned neighborhood public school. It absolutely is a violation of civil rights, especially as money is tied to the privatization agenda. In fact, I would argue that fighting for the rights of students with disabiltiies is one of the greatest opportunities to bring down this entire digusting corporate, business-centered, neoliberal education reform movement. Let’s get back to child-centered education, where every child is valued and loved, not shamed and excluded simply because of a disabilty!
Lots to respond to, but I’ll start here. Some of the strongest advocates and challengers of charters are parents with students with special needs. That’s because
a. Some parents have found the charter movement is a way to establish schools that are more responsive to their students and their families. Two examples
http://www.mdsmn.org/
http://www.lionsgateacademy.org/
b. Some parents have been frustrated or disappointed by the treatment that they have received they have received by some charters
Same is true of district public schools. Some of the strongest supporters of district public schools are parents of special needs students who have been pleased by the way their youngsters have been treated. Opposite also true.
So you are working hard to close down the Chicago magnets that have been keeping out kids for decades who can’t pass their admission tests?
The original idea of charter schools was that they would be havens for students who struggle in more traditional settings, i.e. drop-outs, kids w/behavior problems, students with disabilities who needed alterantive placement options. If charters actually lived up to that need, then I would be mush more likely to support them.
The vast majority of charters do NOT perform this vital function. They tend to exclude the very kids they were meant to help and are used to promote an agenda like breaking unions, priavatization/profiteering, and giving low-income children segregated education on the cheap instead of addressing inequities. In fact, the few schools that do try to buck the trend of “no excuses” fanchise chains and actually serve the neediest children, tend to get shut down because…low and behold, their test scores suffer.
At this point, I do not believe the charter movement can be redeemed. It is being used to starve neighborhood schools and eventually shut them down which has disparate impact on our most fragile students. A failed experiment that is actively hurting children must end immediately.
Katie, since I helped write the nation’s first charter law, helped start some of the first charter public schools and have worked with legislators around the country on this issue, I want to respond to your description of the “original idea.”
The original ideas were to
a. Help provide options for a variety of youngsters – not just those with whom traditional schools were not succeeding. The first charter to be approved was a Montessori elementary in Winona, Mn (small city in SE Minnesota). This school served a cross section of elementary students. It had been trying unsuccessfully to work with the local district to be an option. They worked out an agreement that it would be a charter. The second charter to be approved, and the first to begin functioning as a charter was a school created by a small group of educators in St. Paul Mn who wanted to work with students with whom traditional schools have not succeeded.
b. Help provide options for families looking for something different than the district or community in which they lived was offering. This might be a language immersion or a project based or a Core Knowledge, or …. Some families that had tried to convince local districts to offer new options – either stand alone or schools within schools had helped create new charters. Same is true of community groups.
c. Help provide new professional opportunities. As mentioned in other posts, one of the first charters was established by a group of rural public school educators who wanted to function as a cooperative, with teachers being a majority of members of the board that ran the school. This school has grown to more than 30 schools with similar ideas around the country.
d. Help encourage existing districts to be more responsive to families and educators. This has happened sometimes, and not happened sometimes. I could give various examples but this post is long enough.
We’ll see what happens over the next few years as to whether there are growing # of charters and growing numbers of students attending them. We’ll also see if there are more examples of district charter collaboration. And we’ll see if progressives in both district and charter worlds are able to help convince policy-makers to use broader methods of assessing student progress.
In regards to magnet schools, I have always believed that there are equity issues surrounding this practice. However, they were begun with integration in mind and do tend to be, at least in Chicago, our most integrated schools (but with an overrepresentation of white/middle class students). Most that I know of do not have tests to get in, they are random lotteries (Maybe you are thinking of selective enrollment??). Magnets are also unionized schools with local school councils (democratic voice in community school governance for parents, teachers, community members and in high school, students) and some do provide special education services similar to neighborhood schools. They are staffed with fully-certified, experienced teachers and use proven creative curriculum and specialty programs. Their demographics tend to look like this: http://www.cps.edu/Schools/Pages/school.aspx?id=610363
Charters are another beast altogether. They are almost without exception highly-segregated schools that tend to look like this: http://www.cps.edu/Schools/Pages/school.aspx?id=400033 There is no democratic voice, the teachers are often not unionized (although this is changing in Chicago, one school at a time), and many use questionable practices like hiring many uncertified teachers, having scripted curriculum, and using cruel, borderline corporal punishment “no excuses” discipline.
I would love for ALL schools to look more like magnets. I do not want all schools to look like charters. Charters provide low-quality education for low-income students of color. And that is wrong.
But of course, the real issue is that charters are NOT public schools. The courts have already ruled on the question, albeit on labor grounds. But remember, my working conditions are the students’ learning conditions.
IF there are ANY federal federal funds received by this charter,(or others), and the conditions are such as described by the mother, the parent writes ( maintains a copy) a formal Complaint (sent as a registered letter, return receipt requested), stating what this parent describes,,to her District Superintendent of Schools with copies (also registered) to the State Department of Education, the State Board of Education, the U.S. Department of Education, (OSEP), and the Office of Civil Rights (OCR). All addresses can be secured on the Web. While at it, I would suggest she include her representatives in Congress requesting the assistance of their offices.
Because states have arrangements with public-private (for profit) school charters, the Charter State Board of Education may exist and she may need to send a registered copy to that entity as well.. . AZ has such an arrangement….In the Complaint,to all recipients the parent requests that her Complaint receive a written response within ten working days assuring that the Charter is not in receipt of any federal funds or support from any source solely or in combination…….Civil Rights Ar Not Up For Sale….
As a former special education teacher in a charter school, I was asked by my administration to discourage parents of children with high levels of need from enrolling, although we were not legally allowed to deny them admission. In order to do this I had to explain to parents of a student in need of a life skills class that we could certainly enroll them, however in order for them to have placement in a class that would meet their needs they would have to be bussed to another district. This had many of them walking out the door. The school’s reasoning? It would cost us more to educate this child than the per pupil funding we would get back from the district. Kids with speech only IEPs however were *great* because we would get the same per pupil funding as we would for a child with an IEP who needed several hours of services a day. I was supposed to explain to parents that all of their child’s services would be provided in an inclusion setting . . . NO pull-out, not even for an 8th grader on a 3rd grade reading level who was obviously in need of something more in the way of reading instruction, or a processing room or social skills class for a child with emotional difficulties. Please understand that this is not legal, we were required to provide a continuum of services, we just didn’t, and parents didn’t know enough to fight back. Because it is a charter and all employment is ‘at will’ if you dont fall in line with the marching orders you’re out in fairly short order. Needless to say, I am no longer there, but on my terms.
Why is it always the person, the person, the person and never the proposition, the proposition, the proposition? I never speculate on what has made you who you are. I like your steadiness and strength. BUT you’re like someone’s grandmother whose only question that ever mattered about a girl her grandson dated, was “Is she Catholic?” The psychology of the man is irrelevant; only the truth of his views matters. WHY is it always better to stick to the union?
It is true that charters don’t serve students of the entire spectrum of in Special Education. When making a profit is a top priority, providing extra special ed. materials often takes a back seat. They also routinely break the law in other ways. They ignore LRE. They don’t provide adequate supplies and learning materials. In my state, they have a reputation of not following the law and getting away with it. I often wonder if the Education Secretary gives a hoot. It doesn’t seem like it.
I have been an advocate for the disabled for nearly forty years. Sitting from my perch this is what I see. The golden age of special education was a magnificent testament to our country and our government (that is us!). The big BUT in this was the naive thought by some that it would “cure” the problem but they never regarded the science and technology which can now prove the existence and reality of brain function and differences. So the numbers escalated and the need for resources, finances (special education has always been massively underfunded), and trained personnel. This was going on while mental health initiatives were being kicked to the curb. Those services became more profit bearing. We created a system of For Profit Prisons. Some formula for failure don’t you think?!!! The creeping move to complete privitzation and narrowed ownership,power and governance by a privileged few. Top it off with the biggy of financial manipulation and failure (created by the same architects of these system failures). Far fetched? I think not!!!
So what to do?!! Well, the move to start to blame the victim, put parent against parent, kiting special education funding for other purposes in districts that were budget challenged, etc. etc. Introducing an Inclusion model before readiness or even an expectation that there would be appropriate readiness in most school, especially inner city, for the intake of these students. And before you knew it the Learning Disabled student was no longer identified and we were back to the severe model of special education and the push through drop out LD was no more but just another failed kid in the classroom. Don’t forget the pharmaceutical industry is part of this formula as well.
Medication as a cure-all.
Ah! But wait! The LD were used for one more manipulation of the government/corporate move to dismantle and redesign the entire education system of our country, and others.Yep! Use them to be included in tests for measurement without regard to the damage and deceit that it caused and that it is! The unions looked the other way, the administrations followed orders from above, the teachers helpless to the truth and the paycheck, and the children doomed! Forget the parents, completely out of the loop. And then the move to an already put in place Privatized Charter School movement. Follow the money!!!!!!!!!!!
Even that was not enough. As long as public charters too even a dollar of federal funds they were to give the same services. Oh well!! Time to make every charter private because then you could the rights to first refusal and rid yourself of student and certainly any of the laws that protect those students. But even private schools must be mindful that federal mandates and protections do exist (Civil Rights 504section, American Disabilities Act) and they can be challenged. But of course, schools have deep pockets for lawsuits and parents (most especially now) more often then not can not afford the lawyer or the consulting fees to prove the case. Game over! Due process a sham for most and a horrible endurance test for others! Cases can take years and children grow up. Adults services are worse and the beat goes on. Special Education was, as I said in the beginning, one of the highest tributes to our country that you will find. What a shame that some folks still don’t get it!
The public schools are about to get a Tsunami of special education students while the “best an brightest” and “value added” students being siphoned away through the sorting mechanism of the corporate business model looking for their future employees. Choice?
Really?!!! I will continue to advocate for these students if for nothing else then a level playing field within their classrooms. Wish them and me luck. We need it!
So Renee, where is your anger at Congress, which promised to provide 40% of special ed funding but has never come clsoe?
Where is your anger at the selective magnet schools that won’t touch kids with special needs unless they can pass the tests you don’t like?
What the politicians lied? No way José!
By the way “Do you know the way to San Jose?”
Interesting that you did not recognize my anger in this or anything else I have written. I suppose you would have recognized it in the
testimony I have given before my State Board of Education over many years. Or maybe through the almost forty years of advocacy
I have proudly been involved in or fighting this same battle for individual children throughout my state and country. Maybe you weren’t with me when I took myself to Washington,D.C. and banged on the doors of our representatives and USDOE and to Trenton,NJ and banged on more doors and spoke with and gave testimony to more deaf but polite ears about the failure to the promise of the 40% in funding. So forth and so on.
Interesting, I respect you and your work, but get past yourself and understand that in this blog you will find many fighters for children, like yourself, who have had to fight from less positions of authority or an entry based on the ivory tower credentials of others. Parents who have pounded doors and ears for years and were ignored or disregarded by education elites who thought them to lowly to be recognized and only used to further their own positions or coffers.
As one commissioner of education once said to be as I sat for years, driving over four hours each meeting for an “advisory” committee (appointed by the Gov.) that we were only a group that complied with their obligation to the law and basically irrelevent to their purpose. A check off! After three years of that crap I walked out.
Where is my anger? It is used for continuing to get out the word that others would silence. It was used to bring conferences and symposiums to my state with experts who could educate and open minds of the parents and the professionals. My anger has been harnessed towards action. It helps me to try and tolerate people who go to personal attack as you did. Unfortunate, because I read everything you write and value your expertise and opinions.
Oh! By the way, I served on a special services school board for thirteen years and helped to get the most severe and profound children in our area out of crappy unsafe buildings and into a spanking new state of the art school which we had to go through a referendum because the politicians of our area would not put our kids in a better school. That took a 64% vote of yes to get done. Thirteen years on a school board and fifteen years as a state president of NJLDA. I work in an inner city school district for the last twelve years advocating for families of special needs children. I have LD children of my own and an Autistic nephew. Advocate for the disabled and pot mixer for a lifetime.
Where is my anger, Joe Nathan? You just got a piece of it!! But I will continue to respect your caring for children and their futures. As I told a Senator in my state once when he threatened me about children and placements “Never threaten the mama bear when she is defending her baby bears!!” I will sign off with the name I was referred to as on receiving an award from the Omega Fraternity of Black Professionals a few years back and which I have been so proud of….it was Warrior Princess! High praise indeed and speaks to where my advocacy has taken me. My anger is for action!!!!
P.S. I have a degree in special education and public relations, mother of three and grandmother to two and am a seventy year old white Jewish woman who writes rap songs. Enough said!!!!!
Yup, got your anger. African American parents also have given me an award because I worked to empower them – not to force them to accept what I thought was best for them.
Shabbot shalom.
Then I congratulate you on your work on behalf of those you helped and those who gained from your desire to make a better world without prejudice towards anyone. What I find unsettling is your assumption on knowing the other person by your remarks.
Continue to do good and live and be well. There are too many battles ahead to continue this waste of both our time.
People are judged by their actions – sounds like you also have advocated for others. I think it’s important not just to impose what I think is right on others – but to help give them more options.
We totally agree on your point. The very place special education and it’s protections were coming to and then the bottom fell out. Options for placement and a free appropriate (forget best and hope not to be in the state of adequate) public education is probably one of the most forward places education and our nation have gone. My fear is the Private Charter School with a For Profit incentive will cherry pick the gifted LD and not retrofit their teaching environment for the challenged learner who has complications and requires expensive accommodations. Public schools do not have the luxury of rights to first refusal, and they have never been fully funded for their legal obligations to provide the above for the special education sudents who are their charge. This brings us back to the very beginning of our discussion.
So, I will end by saying it is a pleasure to know there are those, such as yourself, who still have fire in their stomach to advocate for children and options for an education that will provide them a level education playing field and the foundation for a future of purpose and survival. Thank you for continuing the journey with all those that truly care about humanity and equity.
We believe we are having this problem at a charter school in Northern MN, as well. My older child goes to the school and has for 3 years. They are being hard to work with on a Section 504 Plan for my younger child entering kindergarten with a serious health issue. I am calling everyone I can think of and am hoping I can get these things changed. They should not be able to get away with this. Call the authorizer of the charter, if you haven’t already, and also the Office of Compliance at the MN Dept. of Education. I was told by the nurse, who then quit, that the school was not currently prepared to serve my child and she also suggested I try the local district school. I believe even saying such a thing is an actionable complaint with the Office of Civil Rights. Give them a call. Call everyone. Write a letter to the editor. I have not gotten any results yet but I am going to keep on this. I’ve involved the board and a national advocacy organization who actually hooked me up with a free lawyer. still don’t have results, even with a lawyer. But if I cannot safely enroll my son there, I am not going to just give up.