This is very sad. It was written in response to this post. This is a report on the technocratic data collection about preschool readiness of children with disabilities 0-3. There is not a whiff of humanity in this data collection. What are they thinking in the Tennessee State Department of Education? Does any of this help children? Is it part of Race to the Top? What is the point? What benefit to the children? What am I missing? A reader writes: “Tennessee has been using this measure for 4 years. (I am in no way condoning this) Target Data and Actual Data for FFY 2012-13: FFY 2012-13 was the third full year in which Early Childhood Outcomes (ECO) data (entrance and exit) were collected from all nine TEIS Point of Entry offices (TEIS-POEs). Since FFY 2010, ECO data have been collected in the Tennessee Early Intervention Data System (TEIDS) based upon the seven-point scale of the ECO Child Outcomes Summary Form (COSF). The Lead Agency calculates and reports only on children that have been in TEIS a minimum of 6 months (defined as 183 calendar days between entry [ECO entrance date] and exit [ECO exit date]). Outcome entrance ratings are made by the IFSP team using assessment/evaluation, eligibility, and parent information at the initial IFSP meeting. Statewide, assessment/evaluation information is obtained from the Battelle Developmental Inventory-2 (BDI-2). Outcome exit ratings are made by the IFSP team at a review change or transition meeting for children who have been in early intervention services for a minimum of 6 months prior to exit or at three years of age. Exit data from Part C are utilized by several Local Education Agencies (LEAs) as entry data for children who are determined eligible for Part B, preschool special education services. http://www.tn.gov/education/early_learning/doc/TN_PartC_APR_FFY_2012-13.pdf

Connecticut has formalized the process for evaluation child outcomes and gathering data on the 3year old and up group:
Anyone with young children should pay attention to the Office of Early Childhood, newly formed in CT and their role in determining your child’s “healthy, safety and school readiness.” This information will be captured in the under-construction early childhood data tracking system.
If your child does not “demonstrate empathy” at 3 years old, or “respond appropriately to emotional cues” they may get “tagged” in the new Teaching Strategies Gold Program (HERE ARE THE ALIGNED Connecticut STANDARDS: http://teachingstrategies.com/…/CT-GOLD-Alignment-PS…)
THIS will be part of the Office of Early Childhood “tracking system” under development in CT! This system is underway to track “the health, safety, and school readiness” of all children in its network: http://www.cga.ct.gov/2014/BA/2014SB-00025-R02-BA.htm
The government will be deciding what constitutes “healthy, safety and school readiness” for our children. If our children don’t meet someones benchmark, then what? Whatever happened to play-based learning??
ALL this data will be stored in some repository on these children, with their names and everything attached…forever!
LikeLike
Connecticut has formalized the process for evaluation child outcomes and gathering data on the 3year old and up group:
Anyone with young children should pay attention to the Office of Early Childhood, newly formed in CT and their role in determining your child’s “healthy, safety and school readiness.” This information will be captured in the under-construction early childhood data tracking system.
If your child does not “demonstrate empathy” at 3 years old, or “respond appropriately to emotional cues” they may get “tagged” in the new Teaching Strategies Gold Program (HERE ARE THE ALIGNED Connecticut STANDARDS: http://teachingstrategies.com/…/CT-GOLD-Alignment-PS…)
THIS will be part of the Office of Early Childhood “tracking system” under development in CT! This system is underway to track “the health, safety, and school readiness” of all children in its network: http://www.cga.ct.gov/2014/BA/2014SB-00025-R02-BA.htm
The government will be deciding what constitutes “healthy, safety and school readiness” for our children. If our children don’t meet someones benchmark, then what? Whatever happened to play-based learning??
ALL this data will be stored in some repository on these children, with their names and everything attached…forever!
LikeLike
That is awesome…Now if they would just do it with TAG students so the countries brightest minds wouldn’t be left to rot for the first 6 years of their life would be great.
LikeLike
What is TAG?
LikeLike
Talented and Gifted
LikeLike
On Ohio, teachers were told, “You must fill in this data on each student, identifying how many weeks of each month each child was in your class. It must be completed by next Friday. You have 10 work days to comply. Our school should be the leader in this.”
We weren’t told why this was being done, but after a tiny bit of research and discussion, we realized that it WS a means of tracking which teacher could be the source of weakness for each child as they fed in AYP and VAM to the data bank. The point was to find a way to verify that a teacher should be let go based on test scores.
It seems that this preschool tracking wants to have data points for reference to evaluate which adult contacts are successful and which are not. Given the unique needs of each student, this seems to simply follow the business model of treating each kid as a widget that needs fixed. And determining each child’s discreet needs is to come as early as possible.
In my experience with implementation of the Ohio Proficiency Test in the 1990s, tests were given to all schools in urban, suburban, and rural areas in order to be “fair” because no one wanted any political fallout because urban and rural school children were treated differently. Gradually the tests became punitive with the onset of NCLB and the competition for bragging rights began. Now we have this mess with RttT.
The stress has been alleviated with the onset of a new principal who isn’t punitive and who is encouraging, so that is much better.
In any case, these kids are tracked in ways that teachers are required to do, just like programming an IBM card in the 1970s. And it isn’t comfortable for anyone. Schools do what they do to get the funding they need to deal with all sorts of children’s needs.
LikeLike
Sadly this is SO NOT SURPRISING. Maybe these “business bureaucrats” who hire the folks who put these data studies together along with those willing to create them should watch a pre k teacher give a child a huge smile and see how far this goes in the “motivation” department at this stage of a child’s development or perhaps giving a child words of praise along with a smile! Last time I checked, children learn that living things need sunshine, water, food first and foremost to survive etc… If you had to live on a deserted island would you want food and water or data????
The prison sentence when these folks are finally charged with INFLICTION OF CHILD ABUSE should be years of confinement where they have to collect date on everything… how many flies enter their prison room, how many times the toilet flushes, how many times a guard passes by and keys jingle vs. how many times the keys do not jingle, guessing what they are going to have for breakfast each day for a year etc.. Then they can create spreadsheet after spread sheet .. oh yes… and if their data is flawed along the way, they go to solitary confinement where they have volumes and volumes of mundane statistical data to read. Let them live and drowned by data.
I am forever asking, “When will this utter nonsense stop”? What makes matters even more absurd is that more often than not, statisticians will tell you that the “data” makes no sense. Nobody seems to respect the field of statistics and the fact that people spend years and years learning about statistics before they would venture to do what all these “corporate ed reform” bureaucrats are doing or expecting educators with no statistical expertise to do anyway. Teachers’ careers now depend on their ability to figure out “which students” to choose for their Charlotte Danielson style Learning Outcomes. Let’s measure everyone and everything TO DEATH? Really?????? Crappy data in equals crappy data out… and we lose essential education time while we are jumping through these artificial hoops – that summarizes the entire NCLB/RTTT age of DATA OBSESSION.
LikeLike
“The prison sentence when these folks are finally charged with INFLICTION OF CHILD ABUSE should be years of confinement where they have to collect date on everything…”
Artseagal, since your idea involves the here and now it sounds even better than this:
Karmic Gods of Retribution: Those ethereal beings specifically evolved to construct the 21st level in Dante’s Hell. The 21st level signifies the combination of the 4th (greed), 8th (fraud) and 9th (treachery) levels into one mega level reserved especially for the edudeformers and those, who, knowing the negative consequences of the edudeformers agenda, willing implemented it so as to go along to get along (see GAGA). The Karmic Gods of Retribution also personally escort these poor souls, upon their physical death, to the 21st level unless they enlighten themselves, a la one D. Ravitch, to the evil and harm they have caused so many innocent children, and repent and fight against their former fellow deformers. There the edudeformers and GAGAers will lie down on a floor of smashed and broken ipads and ebooks curled in a fetal position alternately sucking their thumbs to the bones while listening to two words-Educational Excellence-repeated without pause for eternity.
LikeLike
Duncan was on Twitter last night selling ed tech product and screens to public schools. Incredibly, he points to Brenda Scott in Detroit as a model for US public schools:
“Take what’s happening at the Brenda Scott School in Detroit. In one classroom I visited, the teacher was working directly with just a few students who immediately needed her help. The rest were engaged in small-group projects, building 3-D models or working on laptops – a flexibility made possible by digital technology and independent learning plans.”
Brenda Scott is part of the failed ed reform experiment in Detroit, where they crammed 100 low income kindergartners into one class in an EAA school and replaced teachers with screens to cut costs on staffing.
Someone should tell the people at the US Dept of Education that if they want to sell ed tech product to public schools, pointing to their failed experiment in Detroit, Michigan might not be the best pitch. No one outside DC and ed reform lobbying circles considers the EAA a success. Snyder in Michigan doesn’t even mention the EAA anymore because he wants to get re-elected.
Does the US Department of Education really want public schools to cram 100 kids into a class? Why are they selling this model to low income and middle class public schools? If we wanted our public schools to look like a Rocketship school, we’d replace our schools with an ed tech charter chain.
http://www.classroomtechnologynews.com/education-advocacy/teaching-our-teachers-arne-duncan-on-bridging-the-digital-divide
LikeLike
It seems like someone should report overcrowded rooms to the fire department. If room capacity numbers are too high, the school should be shut down until they are in compliance with fire laws.
LikeLike
It’s scary, because I’m afraid public schools are going to get snookered and make really poor decisions as far as allocation of funding. I don’t want every public school in the country to get ripped off like happened in Los Angeles.
They have to resist Duncan’s sales job. They have to use their own judgment. Duncan is pushing ed tech so hard. The pressure must be enormous to conform and follow, particularly because he’s having them sign this ridiculous “contract” where they promise to push ed tech and screens in their schools.
The fact is, the Obama Administration has been terrible for public schools. Public schools have to STOP following their bad advice.
Rushing to make a huge investment in ed tech is bad advice. It’s dumb. I hope they don’t fall for it.
LikeLike
I am subbing in my district. It is so nice to see what goes on at each grade level in different building. We have a grant for Chromebooks, 5-12. These are very bare bones tablets. The screen is small. The keyboard is limited. No function keys. The screen brightness is low and the fonts are hard to read. Not just for someone who retired, but for the students. This isn’t too expensive, though, and the students enjoy using them. They have specific lessons and are able to see their work. They can work from home and review or edit answers. So, there are positive experiences possible. But the tech should be used as a tool, not as a teacher replacement.
Jumping in head first is frightening to many, but it is a useful tool. I see kids who would otherwise be average might stand out because of their tech abilities. We all have a lot to learn. But everything we do needs to be tempered with developmental appropriateness. Arne Duncan doesn’t get it.
LikeLike
“Does the US Dept of Ed really want public schools to cram 100 kids in a class?”
Only in the poor neighborhoods, with high concentrations of children of color.
LikeLike
The root of the accountability nightmare is some faceless public/private entity’s political assertion that it has the authority to make (and enforce) decisions about individual children and teachers based on data it possesses and interprets.
We don’t even know who is making that claim. Accountability discourse is constructed by invisible powers off stage, and there is no point at which its underlying claims can be disputed. I was about to write that I couldn’t even describe the pitiful,contorted presentation my own superintendent made yesterday morning, in our own school library.
And then I just realized, by God I can. “This is not going away”. “We all know this is wrong, but it’s the law and we need to find a way to work with it.” We’ll see about that.
LikeLike
Chemtchr, you got that right. Here is Arne’s new & improved Special Education “support” plan.
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/speced/2014/10/education_department_restructu.html All of our students special education information- grades, IEP progress, the kitchen sink, are being aggregated into a score and given to a third party.
Every state has (soon to be past tense) a regional support center that housed state SPED employees. Their responsibilities were broad. The people were usually ex-teachers or education administrators who monitored schools for IEP compliance, provided parent & teacher training on new SPED initiatives and kept area stakeholders informed of new or changed IDEA regs (IDEA’s legal mandates are translated by DoEd into regulations that every school system must enact in order to guarantee kids with disabilities rights & protections.)
The role of the state & federal govt. as a protector of the rights of kids with disabilities is over. Now their role is to empower and enrich third party vendors. I’m certain we’ll soon see Arne in congress working hand-in-hand with profiteers to dismantle IDEA.
LikeLike
Although I am usually pretty pragmatic, and therefore negative, regarding the reform juggernaut, I have to inject a small ray of hope here.
My district has always been a follower of any latest trend in education. My non-educator, ex-military superintendent, from Chicago (trained under Paul Vallas) has never met a business scam reform that he didn’t love. We underwent creative disruption and saw over 200 long-term, experienced, local employees fired and escorted out of their offices during his first 6 months on the job. All were replaced with business people, few of which had education experience and most of whom are not qualified to do their jobs. Our district exists in a chaotic whirl of incompetence and confusion now.
Florida is the ALEC leader in passing stupid legislation and Jeb Bush’s cronies run Tallahassee still.
Having said all of that, however, I have to note that yesterday our locally elected school board actually had a workshop on testing. There were actual discussions about sending a letter to the state legislature asking for relief from all the testing and criticizing the effects of the unscientific VAM law.
This is huge! Never before has anyone in this district dared to question a single reform. All have been embraced eagerly and forced upon the teachers, students, and parents with threats of dire consequences for non-compliance.
Parents are showing up in huge numbers to our board meetings, decrying the taking away of recess for computerized test prep, complaining about their children being tested constantly and their child’s teacher being treated appallingly.
It is a small step but for the pushback to be beginning here is a huge sign to me that the reformists’ days are numbered.
Take hope, everyone! As Diane frequently tells us, we will prevail!
LikeLike
“This is huge! Never before has anyone in this district dared to question a single reform. All have been embraced eagerly and forced upon the teachers, students, and parents with threats of dire consequences for non-compliance.”
That’s great. I agree that the teacher/parent/public school push-back to testing has been effective advocacy. It’s been fun to watch national ed reform politicians and lobbyists scramble to catch up and insist they were against this ALL ALONG 🙂
I understand why public schools are so cowed and were following rather than leading. They’re surviving in a really toxic environment at the state and federal levels, and the blizzard of reforms and the resulting constant chaos and churn must make it difficult just to keep afloat let alone dissenting or questioning. Hopefully some public school leaders have “found their voice” and won’t be led around by the nose anymore 🙂
They DON’T have to follow every fad and take every directive from the ed reform “movement”. They can dissent.
LikeLike
This is why I have some misgivings about the expansion of Pre-Kindergarten. It is currently a blank slate that efficiency-minded “educators” like Arnie Duncan can write on. Given the chance, I think he’ll be touting privatized solutions. Worse of all, TN’s practice introduces even younger children to the “efficient” practice of grouping by age cohorts and using standardized tests to determine their “readiness” to enter the next level at factory schools who seek “ready-to-learn” widgets. Maybe we should wait to promote Pre-K until we are disabused of the notion that the private sector can run things better than “the government” and that we can measure learning with a standardized test.
LikeLike
I agree. I think the ed reform pre-K will look exactly like the ed reform K-12 – testing, screens, privatization, crazed ranking and sorting and economic theories of “effectiveness” replacing any common sense or human judgment.
How could it look any different? It’s the same 150 ed reform leaders at the national level and they all agree with one another. Duncan hasn’t budged an inch off The Dogma since he walked into that office, and he surrounds himself with people who agree with him. The people who left the Obama Administration all went into consulting or promoting ed reform in media. If anything, there is a larger group of true believers, and now they have a “legacy” to protect.
LikeLike
BUT, how huge is the sector of the American workforce that needs free childcare or would welcome the possibility for both parents to work outside the home full-time without the expense of childcare? Mandated early education amounts to free daycare and is welcomed for many parents, as are extended school day programs. People are going to sign up in droves and assume behaviorist learning techniques are just wonderful.
Once again, the wealthy who can be stay at home moms and organize playgroups and field trips and home learning activities, or afford Montessori preschool or half-day church basement pre-schools… they will raise the kids ready to read by 1st grade.
LikeLike
All you are missing is that none of this is sad to the technocratic tyranny. It will relentlessly march on until it runs up against what Chris/FL describes, a group of parents showing up at local board meetings and school board members listening to them and thinking with them.
Could they/dare they compose and send a letter to the state legislature? What does it look like when a community votes NO to any section of the ALEC agenda? That discussion becomes the Magic Moment when the mad momentum comes to an abrupt halt.
LikeLike
“Jumping in head first is frightening to many, but it is a useful tool. I see kids who would otherwise be average might stand out because of their tech abilities. We all have a lot to learn. But everything we do needs to be tempered with developmental appropriateness. Arne Duncan doesn’t get it.”
I don’t have any problem with schools integrating tech into their individual schools in a responsible way.
I would just run like hell from the Obama Administration when they’re pushing this bogus “contract” however. They don’t have a great track record with public schools. Might be best to take advice from people who actually value your school and don’t have an agenda.
http://tech.ed.gov/futureready/
LikeLike
I could enter this on the thread of any of the past three posts to come into my inbox.
1. Finland does not start formal schooling until age 7
2. We have known for quite some time that we do not get reliable testing results on most students until around 3rd grade, which would be around age 6-8. or about when Finland starts formal schooling
3. The first grade of K-12 is titled Kindergarten – children’s garden – and originally the notion was based on the work of Froebel, and the issue was NOT college-career readiness, but a transition from t5he environment of a sheltered home to a more social and learning environment. Note that word – “transition” – not immediate full immersion
4. I am 68, from an upper middle class white family, both parents college educated with post-college studies as well (father ABD in economic
s, mother a lawyer). Prior to Kindergarten I wen to a nursery school, what is now called Pre-K. It was almost exclusively focused on social adjustment and some very basics about learning. There were NO tests. It is inconceivable to me that any adults are obsessing over the learning at this age level. Kids develop very differently and by emphasizing performance we are going to turn them OFF to learning.
LikeLike
It’s the unholy marriage of academic rigor and early intervention.
LikeLike
You don’t happen to know how Finland handles special needs kids, do you? Public school pre-school starting at age 3 (half special needs kids, half typical in each classroom) was a turning point for my kid on the spectrum. It really made a tremendous difference, don’t think he would be where he is today without it (academic pathway in HS). I can’t think of what we could have substituted for those four half-days a week that would have been anywhere as powerful.
But of course, his preschool experience was all about social learning and living skills, not academics, unless you want to count the “letter of the week” activities, and learning to hold a crayon and scissors.
LikeLike
97% of Finnish 3-6 year-olds are enrolled in preschool (and an enormous percentage of 0-3s are in daycare). Here is the Finnish national pre-K curriculum: http://www.oph.fi/download/153504_national_core_curriculum_for_pre-primary_education_2010.pdf
I’m not sure how this isn’t considered “formal” schooling. Maybe it is organized differently than our schools and is more play-based, but there is clearly a great deal of academic content and expectation that the children will learn.
Finnish kids do well when they hit “formal” schooling because they have been prepared for it by years of preschool.
LikeLike
Tim,
There is no standardized testing in Finnish schools until the end of high school. Do you recommend that too?
LikeLike
What I wrote wasn’t meant to be an opinion on the merits of Finnish preschool. It was to point out that the “Finns don’t begin formal schooling until 7” talking point requires significant qualification.
Finland is a lot smaller than and way less diverse than Minnesota. Its homogeneity lends itself to cultural norms much different from ours. I’m not sure that what works for them will work for us, including their much shorter window of compulsory education and the competitive exams administered to 16-year-olds that effectively determine the course of their lives.
LikeLike
Tim,
Your hostility to US public education is showing. Our schools could operate far better without standardized testing. I went through 13 years of public school and never took a standardized test until I took the SAT. No tutoring. No PSAT. We don’t have to be Finland to recognize that standardized testing narrows education and warps the education of children. When President Obama’s children start taking standardized tests, let me know.
LikeLike
Okay, I’m letting you know: Sidwell Friends students take standardized, multi-part, multi-day bubble tests in grades 5-8–http://www.sidwell.edu/data/files/news/MSNewsletterFromtheSchoolNews/Standardized_Testing.docx
That is in addition to the extremely high-stakes IQ tests students take—at the age of 4—to enter schools like Sidwell in the first place.
President Obama’s daughters attend a school where the teachers aren’t unionized. Tenure doesn’t exist. Many classroom teachers have no formal training in education; about 20% don’t even have a graduate degree.
Given these conditions, shouldn’t we be taking pity on the President’s daughters?
LikeLike
Tim,
I pity the students at Sidwell Friends if they too are forced to take useless standardized tests. No one should opt out. I am surprised the parents at Sidwell are not demanding an end to this waste of their children’s time.
LikeLike
Read the description of the testing and how it is used. THERE IS NO TEST PREP! teachers review the tests for formative information. No one is held back or thrown out for poor results. This testing is in no way comparable.
LikeLike
Furthermore, it is NOT a three day long test. From there description, there are two testing blocks during the day that do not take up the whole day.
LikeLike
CX; their description
LikeLike
From the end of the Sidwell document explaining the three day-long standardized tests administered on computers:
” Parents will receive results by the first week of March. It is important to remember that standardized test scores are only one measure of a student’s academic profile, a snapshot if you will. A more complete and accurate picture emerges when the scores are combined with classwork, daily performance, regular assignments, projects, and tests. Still, the ERB/CTP’s can help parents and teachers understand more clearly and completely a child’s balance of strengths and needs. Teachers may review the scores in detail, looking for patterns that emerge from one year to the next, and then use that information to be more effective in the classroom.”
That seems pretty reasonable to me.
What about the fact that teachers at Sidwell won’t ever be in a union or receive tenure? What about the fact that by your standards, many of them are unqualified? Do you think the faculty at Sidwell can’t effectively advocate for children? Do you think because so many teachers have never set foot in a graduate school of education that the quality of instruction at Sidwell is deficient?
LikeLike
If you had ever been exposed to a play-based, child-centered program, you would recognize it in this document even if they didn’t outright say it, which they do. I believe there are some films of their programs available through youtube. I know I have watched such a video in the past, and “academic” was not an adjective that anyone would use to describe the program. I recognize in them the programs my own children attended 30+/- years ago even in kindergarten.
LikeLike
I’ll be honest, the data has nothing in it that is shameful or sad; well maybe the fact that not all children that are in need of intervention are not getting it or getting it in an adequate amount. There is countless data around reading alone that shows the necessity for programs that help children learn to read; other wise reading for literacy and countless other programs are useless. Why is it that in this country we want to turn a blind eye to anything, data collection included, that would bring to light the necessity for contravention. Maybe we need a reality show, after all it worked for raisin public awareness/conversations around drug and alcohol abuse, teen pregnancies, socially disruptive behaviors, hording and a slew of other issues that need addressing both for society and the person/child. What is shameful is that Diane seems to be suggesting that it is better to ignore the children who need it most, to turn a blind eye to just send them off to kindergarten and wish them good luck!
LikeLike
Please spare us the straw man arguments; Diane suggests nothing of the kind.
LikeLike
“after all it worked for raisin public awareness/conversations around drug and alcohol abuse, teen pregnancies, socially disruptive behaviors, hording and a slew of other issues that need addressing both for society and the person/child.”
Wow! I didn’t realize that raisins had so many social problems. They must have come from bad stock.
LikeLike
I’m surprised with you, Duane.
Surely you know that it’s Bad Teachers and Failing (Public) Schools that cause those raisins to encounter such problems.
LikeLike
DS, Not to mention wrinkles.
Is there a charter school for that?
LikeLike
As I read these posts on ages 0 to 3, I finally decided what bothered me the most is how it is a setup to declare a parent as a failure. Raising and nurturing a special needs child is a challenge enough. When one small step is a big, big deal and success is proclaimed, a parent will now be told it doesn’t matter. The child is not pre-K ready and it must be your fault.
LikeLike
Nothing in these state performance reports has to do with reporting ON parents–states have to report on their responsibilities TO parents–to provide them with information and training, to make sure that parents are involved with their child’s transition to school, to make sure that parents know their rights under IDEA. These state performance reports measure the performance of the states in implementing the law, not parents (or even the children)
LikeLike
Julia White, why doesn’t DOE take the many millions needed to fund these reporting requirements and open medical facilities in poor communities to provide direct services to those who need them?
LikeLike
Thank you for the clarification. It helps. If managed properly, this could actually take a large burden off a parent. I now have a new assignment and that is to find out what is going on in Arizona, especially for those in poverty, Spanish speaking,. As they say, it is now on my radar. Again, thank you.
LikeLike
Dianeravitch, why can’t they do both? Why are you against schools being accountable for services for students with disabilities? IDEA does indeed fund community services–community services are a key component of this monitoring. It’s not a zero sum game/either-or proposition. We need a radical revisioning of schooling–please see http://www.swiftschools.org for a model of what could be. Sailor and colleagues are doing phenomenal things that could be a national model.
LikeLike
Julia, I am not opposed to services for children with disabilities. Where did you get that idea? I oppose bureaucratic worship of data and the idea that one can set”measurable and rigorous targets” for children ages 0-3 with disabilities. Children need love and care, not targets.
LikeLike
Barbara, I would urge you to visit http://arizonatash.org and look at what Alfredo Artiles and colleagues are doing at ASU–SUCH good stuff!!!
LikeLike
I’ve been pondering this post all day. I’m not sure–and I’m willing to admit that I might be wrong–but I think the 0-3 early intervention program is designed for children with severe special needs that need medical rehabilitation to prep them for school. At least, that was our experience. My daughter has mild cerebral palsy, and she was tested for free under federal requirements but denied services because she was not severely disabled enough or multiply handicapped. I don’t recall that any of the questions or evaluations had anything to do with school readiness or my parenting ability. So while I think the language in the TN materials is pretty extreme and certainly inflammatory in light of Duncan’s data-driven push, which keeps reaching lower and lower, I’m not seeing anything in the infant-toddler program that causes me alarm. They want kids ready for preschool because that’s where the education rehabilitation begins. That’s the level where I would be concerned about excessive emphasis on performance and data. On the other hand, given the pre-K education rehab focus, the data was probably always there. It’s just being collected, processed and displayed differently now.
LikeLike
Actually, I take back one thing. The infant-toddler program is designed for educational rehab. Now I remember. (It’s been a few years!) We were told that our daughter didn’t qualify because she probably could function in a classroom. The infant-toddler program and the preschool programs are for educational rehab only. Even so, I doubt the focus has changed much, just the language and emphasis on data. But remembering the tests my daughter had to go through, I’m sure they had plenty of data on her back then, too.
LikeLike
TEIS (Tennessee Early Intervention System) is funded through IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Act) part C (Birth-3). It was not designed to be in compliance with RttT. I was a part of this program when it was divided into regions usually housed at TN universities. There were some problems with documentation and data collection so the state came up with their own big data system and took over state control of all the regional programs about 6 years ago. The whole purpose is to locate children with disabilities early so the early interventions can occur. If parents cannot pay for the services the state pays for them. It is a wonderful program since early intervention is the one time when many disabilities can be cured or ameliorated to a significant degree. IDEA has always had compliance targets that states must meet in order to continue to get federal dollars. Every state has it’s own equivalent to TEIS.
LikeLike
So the aim in the case of these programs should be to keep them free of high stakes decisions that end in punitive consequences especially any attempts to privatize what should be a public service.
LikeLike
There are no high stakes decisions in these state performance reports, unless it has to do with the state being penalized for not providing services in a timely manner, e.g., not finding children for services, as Janna says above. This is not linked at all to privatization, this is a federal mandate to find children with disabilities who need services and to provide those services. I really don’t understand why people have issues with states’ being required and having to report on providing services to children with disabilities.
LikeLike
“So the aim in the case of these programs should be to keep them free of high stakes decisions that end in punitive consequences especially any attempts to privatize what should be a public service.”
I did not say there were high stakes: I said we should aim to keep them free of such. As a former special ed teacher, I understand the purpose of diagnostic testing and wish to keep it so. Years ago in my own state, a push was made to report individual scores on the yearly state tests that had been designed to give a snapshot of district performance. The test was not designed for individuals, but the politicians in their infinite wisdom made it so. Thus we have a stack of data that really tells us nothing being used as such a measure.
My comment was a warning.
LikeLike
Again, I’m not sure, but I don’t think the services were completely public in every state. For example, my daughter clearly needed rehab, and the report said so. But she didn’t qualify for the free service because she wasn’t disabled enough. We were referred to private providers. I’ve heard of states where rehab services were provided free of charge; Arkansas under the Clinton administration comes to mind. But I don’t think infant-toddler services were ever 100 percent public services. Only the screening/evaluation service was. To my knowledge, in our state no one has attempted or discussed privatizing these services. They remain a federally funded program operated through the county health department.
LikeLike
The services were usually public but could be private. Whatever met the child’s needs. It depends on what services were available in ones region.
LikeLike
This absolutely speaks to the need to get rid of the 13 disability categories of IDEA, and infuse these rights into ESEA, so that all students who require services can receive them, even if they don’t “qualify” under a particular label. This happens ALL too often.
LikeLike
If folks would actually look at the monitoring tool and the data (using the TN performance report as a model, each state’s structure will be the same), it’s about compliance with THE LAW, not benchmarks for individual children. This is required reporting to OSEP, which reports to Congress. Every state must submit a report on their performance with respect to IDEA (part B is for children 3-21, Part C, 0-3). If you look at the indicators, you will see that they are related to timely delivery of early intervention services (states get dinged if they do not meet the performance benchmark), whether they receive services in the home/community (as opposed to an institutional setting), acquisition of social and academic skills (including the very important communication), whether or not families know their rights, proper implementation of Child Find, whether these toddlers have transition plans to preschool–these are not indicators judging children or families, but are meant to be measures to ensure that children and families are being provided the services to which they have the right under IDEA. Far too often states are out of compliance with the law (see National Council on Disability reports, http://www.ncd.gov), and these benchmarks, which are NOT for children, hold schools accountable for the provision of services to infants, toddlers, children, and young people, 0-21 with disabilities. As someone who laments the fact that children and young people who are served under the category of intellectual disability are largely segregated from their typically developing peers for most of their school lives, I wish that these performance reporting requirements would have more teeth–since research overwhelmingly supports better school and post school outcomes for students with complex support needs if they receive their services in inclusive settings/environments, but are largely not served in them.
LikeLike