Archives for category: Special Education

Recently, while looking for the links between Governor Gina Raimondo, Corey Booker, and Charter Schools, I discovered this interesting critique of charter schools.

That article cited one by Pete Adamy, a professor at the University of Rhode Island, who pointed out that the original purpose of charters was to give teachers the freedom to innovate within their own schools.

Professor Adamy wrote:

“While there are certainly pockets of innovation in Rhode Island’s charter schools, as there are in most public schools in the state, our charters are not “laboratories of innovation,” as some have called them. Rhode Island’s charters have simply been better able to implement reforms that researchers have been pushing for decades: smaller class size, more teacher and administrative autonomy, curriculum that is linked across grade levels, increased parental involvement, community outreach, a coherent and consistent mission, etc.”

He wondered why the state did not take these successful strategies and apply them in public schools. Why benefit a few while ignoring the needs of the many?

The essay that led me to Professor Adamy was written by Robert Yarnall in “Progressive Charlestown,” and he cut right to the heart of the problem with charter schools, the distance the concept has traveled from the original idea of a school-within-a-School run by teachers.

Yarnall writes:

“Virtually every charter school in the state functions as a taxpayer-funded private school, with near-private school levels of control over admissions, student behavior, and parental involvement that are not available to traditional public schools.

“Teachers working in traditional public schools know it, teachers working in next-generation charter schools know it, and the bevy of charter school advocates- the politicians, the privateers, the parent groups- know it.

“This little chunk of inconvenient reality is the tenuous bedrock that the architects of new age charter schools hope to continue to exploit.

“New Age charter school networks react defensively to criticisms that they do not deal with the same sets of challenges as public schools. They routinely publish rebuttal dialogues using the popular “myth v. fact” format in professional marketing campaigns meticulously crafted by the research divisions of prestigious conservative think tanks.

“Their end game, beginning innocently enough with ventures like Rhode Island’s “mayoral academies,” is a gradual for-profit privatization of public education via a post-industrial Ponzi scheme masterminded by a consortium of ideologically conservative legislators, investment firms, and grassroots political action committees intent on exploiting the inherent weaknesses of a public education system struggling to cope with growing pains unleashed by the imperatives stipulated by The Education of All Handicapped Children Act of 1975.”

Yarnall briefly reviews the federal legislation that protects children with disabilities and the bullying that these children sometimes encounter in school because of their differences.

He sees how charter schools fit into the picture:

“A child’s physical and emotional welfare in school is the self-evident primary concern of parents. Academic achievement is important as well, but it necessarily takes second place in any conversation about school choice.

“Columbine and Sandy Hook changed American education forever. Those images lurk in the back of every American parent’s mind. Every time a son or daughter comes home from school with a story about a confrontational incident in school, a parent shudders.

“Some parents believe that New Age charter schools can make those bad thoughts go away by leaving the disruptive children behind in the real public schools. They believe that New Age charter schools, freed from the burden of managing behaviorally disabled children and instructing children with moderate to severe special needs, will produce superior academic gains for their children.

“So unless a child is one of the lucky 5% to pull a winning ticket stub, he or she will not be climbing aboard the charter express. Instead, they will join the other 95% on the regular bus. As Harry Chapin often said, “There’s always room in the cheap seats.”

“The school privatization investment crowd, fronted locally by Governor and former Wall Street hedge fund manager Gina Raimondo, First Gentleman and Director of Industry Learning for McKinsey & Company Andrew Moffitt, and Secretary of Commerce Stefan Pryor, founder of charter school chain Achievement First, Inc.

“They are further advised by Lieutenant Governor of Charter Schools Dennis McKee, former mayor of Cumberland who was instrumental in crafting legislation allowing charter schools to ignore a range of regulatory policies and practices applicable to traditional public schools, some of which are in violation of procedural rights accorded to special needs students by virtue of federal legislation such as PL94-142 and get the attention of advocacy groups because of this.

“The Raimondo Administration is well aware that Rhode Island public school teachers are catching up with their pernicious Wall Street pranks. Once the general public, especially parents of children who choose to remain in traditional public schools, become aware of the real tune that Gina & the Gypsters are having them dance to, the only things being left behind will be derailed political ambitions and a pathetic legacy of financial malfeasance perpetrated by a scurrilous band of Wall Street pirates.”

Success Academy is under fire again for its treatment of students with disabilities. Of course, Success Academy denies the charges.

This is what Chalkbeat reports:

Success Academy officials violated civil rights laws when changing students’ special education services according to a complaint filed Thursday, resulting in some students suddenly changing classrooms and losing months of required instruction.

The complaint, filed with the state’s education department, alleges a pattern of school officials unilaterally changing special education placements without holding meetings with parents, moving students to lower grade levels, and even ignoring hearing officers’ rulings. In some cases, students were removed from classrooms that integrate special and general education students and sent to classrooms that only serve students with disabilities.

Filed by the advocacy group Advocates for Children and a private law firm, the complaint says that Success Academy officials often force parents to fight the charter network in federal court to maintain the services that are listed on a student’s individual learning plan, also known as an IEP.

“Students with disabilities do not give up their civil rights when they enter a charter school,” Kim Sweet, executive director of Advocates for Children, wrote in a statement.

The city’s education department, also named in the complaint, is responsible for making sure students in charter schools receive the services laid out on their learning plans, and setting up meetings with parents to discuss any changes. But, according to the complaint, the education department “has no system to ensure that these schools comply” with those rules.

With 17,000 students, Success Academy is New York City’s largest charter operator and has previously been accused of denying services to students with disabilities, and even pushing them out of their schools. In 2015, at least one school was found to have a “got to go” list of students that school leaders wanted to see leave. More recently, the network filed a lawsuit claiming the opposite is true: Success officials said they often fight for services for students with disabilities, only for the requests to be denied or delayed by the city.

This is Leonie Haimson’s report on the same charges. You will want to open her comment to see the picture of Eva Moskowitz and her family making fun of their critics, holding a banner that says “Success Academy Threatened to Call 911 on 1st Graders”

Rachel Aviv reports in The New Yorker about the scandalous segregated schools for students with disabilities in Georgia.

Georgia has a separate system of schools for children who act out, children whose teachers want to get rid of them. Federal law requires that children with disabilities be educated in the least restrictive environment, but Georgia ignores it. Children, especially black boys, are warehoused in buildings with ill-trained staff and meager instruction. The schools are part of the Georgia Network for Educational and Therapeutic Support (GNETS).

An excerpt:

“The first GNETS school, the Rutland Center, founded in 1970, was once housed in the former West Athens Colored School, whose principal promised to teach the “practical duties of life” to the “inferior race.” The concept for gnets was visionary. According to a report by researchers at the University of Georgia, the schools, then called psychoeducational centers, would rely on teachers trained in developmental psychology, ready to “face the assault of bizarre behavior.” They were taught that they might be the “only agent for change in the life of a disturbed child.” Mary Wood, a professor emerita at the University of Georgia, who developed the concept, said that she intended for each program to have a consulting psychiatrist, a social worker, a program evaluator, and a psychologist. But as the first generation of directors retired, in the nineties, “the pieces of the mosaic dropped out,” she said.

“In the two-thousands, funding was cut, and the psychologists who remained seemed to be given free rein. One mother learned that a school psychologist was planning to subject her daughter, who had post-traumatic stress disorder, to fifteen hours of “experiments” devised to provoke misbehavior. “If I go to a mechanic with my car and my car is not doing the problem that I brought it there for, the mechanic can’t diagnose it,” the psychologist explained, at an administrative trial in 2005. “That’s the same situation here.” Over the years, a few parents became so suspicious of the program that they sent their children to school wearing recording devices. On one tape, a teacher could be heard giving a child what someone in the room called a “be-quiet hit.” On another, teachers laughed about how they had put a student in a seclusion room because they needed a break. In 2004, a thirteen-year-old student hanged himself in a Time Out Room, an eight-by-eight concrete cell that could be locked from the outside.

“Leslie Lipson, a lawyer at the Georgia Advocacy Office, a state-funded agency that represents people with disabilities, said that she first learned of the gnets system in 2001, when a mother called to report that her son was put in a seclusion room nearly every day. “It’s all little black boys at this school,” the mother told her. Lipson researched the mother’s claims and then rushed into her boss’s office to tell him that she’d discovered an “insidious, shadow education system.” She said, “I thought I was Erin Brockovich. I was, like, ‘You are not going to believe this! There is an entire segregated system in Georgia! Can we shut this down immediately?’ I was talking a thousand miles a minute, and my boss waited for me to take a breath. He was, like, ‘Um, yeah, these schools have been around since before you were born.’ ”

“Lipson studied the history of the schools, some of which were established in buildings that had housed schools for black children during the Jim Crow era. At a time when there was an outcry against court-ordered integration, gnets became a mechanism for resegregating schools. “It became a way to filter out black boys, who at younger and younger ages are perceived to have behavioral disabilities,” she said.

“The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (idea) requires that students with disabilities learn in the “least restrictive environment,” a loose term that may mean different things depending on the race or the class of the student. Nirmala Erevelles, a professor of disability studies at the University of Alabama, told me that, “in general, when it comes to people of color—particularly poor people of color—we choose the most restrictive possibility,” sending students to “the most segregated and punitive spaces in the public-school system.” According to Beth Ferri, a disability scholar at Syracuse University, idea provided a kind of loophole to the 1954 Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education, which outlawed racial segregation in schools. Now racial segregation continued “under the guise of ‘disability,’ ” she said. “You don’t need to talk about any race anymore. You can just say that the kid is a slow learner, or defiant, or disrespectful.” Ferri said that idea “treated disability as apolitical—a biological fact. It didn’t think about things like racial or cultural bias.”

“Data obtained through records requests reveal that the percentage of students in the gnets program who are black boys is double that of the public schools in the state. Most of the students in gnets are classified as having an “emotional and behavioral disorder,” a vague label that does not correspond to any particular medical diagnosis. A teacher who worked for five years at a gnets program called Coastal Academy, in Brunswick, told me, “We always had a sprinkling of middle-class white kids, maybe two or three, but they didn’t stay long. Everyone made sure they got out. It was the black students who were trapped there. They came in first grade and never left.” Coastal Academy occupies a lot that once held an all-black school, originally called the Freedman’s School, and the percentage of black males in the program is three times that of the districts that the school draws from. The teacher, who worried that she’d lose her job if she were identified, said that public schools in the area would “send the African-American kids to us for doing things like saying the word ‘shit’ in class or pushing a chair in really loudly. They would never, ever—never in a million years—attempt to come at a white parent with that.””

THe next Governor of Georgia must address this scandal and comply with federal law. The state’s obligation is to act in the best interests of the child.

This story appeared in the Washington Post, by Haben Girma, a disability rights lawyer, author and public speaker.


I am Deaf-blind, and I almost missed my first lesson about Helen Keller. In second-grade U.S. history, my teacher scheduled Helen Keller’s story after a lesson in square-dancing. I remember my heart racing as I danced a do-si-do with my not-so-secret crush. So when our teacher told us about Keller, I was not-so-secretly distracted.

But throughout my schooling, snippets of Keller’s story would come back to me. I would turn to the nearest computer wondering: How did she . . . ? In high school, I finally read her books and marveled that she excelled in college before the Americans With Disabilities Act, before digital Braille and before, of course, the Internet. She pioneered through the world’s unknowns in a way that inspired me as I carved a path for myself. If my school hadn’t taught us about Keller, I might have do-si-do’d a different direction entirely. When I tell people about the path I did take — law studies at Harvard University and work as a disability rights advocate — they think back to their own lessons on Keller. Learning her story sparks something students carry with them into adulthood.

Last week, the Texas Board of Education took a step to remove Keller from the state’s social studies curriculum. The board preliminarily voted to update the K-12 curriculum by eliminating several historical figures, including Keller. Proponents said dropping the Keller lesson would save teachers 40 minutes. The board will make a final decision in November.

Spending 40 minutes annually to teach children about Keller is not just worthwhile but also imperative. The story serves as a gateway to conversations about disability and virtue. It introduces students to Braille, a tactile reading method that blind people have used since 1824. Children also learn about American Sign Language, a visual language developed by the Deaf community. Keller held her hand over another person’s to feel each letter as it was signed, then finger-spelled or voiced her response. She spent her life teaching people about the abilities of people with disabilities. She also advocated for women’s rights, racial equality and workers’ advancement. Keller wanted to make the world better for all of us.

Keller’s story provides an irreplaceable lifelong lesson of optimism, hard work and community inclusion. She labored over her studies, learning to read and write in multiple languages. She set high expectations for herself, gaining admission to Radcliffe College, the sister school to Harvard. Her teachers and friends converted books from print to Braille. She developed a community of friends and colleagues who welcomed her, finger-spelling and all. Successful people with disabilities such as Keller foster these inclusive communities. Disability itself is often not a barrier; the biggest barriers exist in the social, physical and digital environments.

People are dying waiting for disability. What’s taking so long?

In the last two years, nearly 19,000 Americans died waiting for disability. The wait has soared from around 350 days in 2012 to nearly 600 in 2017. (Daron Taylor/The Washington Post)
The techniques a Deaf-blind person uses to navigate those barriers in a sighted-hearing world fascinate students. Whenever I do presentations at schools, students express boundless curiosity about Keller’s story. How could she climb a tree? How did she read if she couldn’t see?

If Texas removes Keller’s story from the curriculum, when will non-disabled children learn about disability? Her story is too often the only disability story. Deleting Keller from the curriculum can mean deleting disability from the curriculum.

Of course, relying on a single story to represent the disability community is in itself a problem. The disability community is diverse, full of rich stories of talented people improving their communities. Students need to learn more about disability, not less. It touches all of our lives. Our bodies change as we age. Anyone can develop a disability at any point or witness a family member or friend do so. More than 57 million Americans have a disability. We number 1.3 billion worldwide — the largest minority group.

Teaching students about disability through the stories of people such as Keller prepares them to be better citizens, better friends and better family members. Keller’s optimism, hard work and commitment to justice inspire them to the same virtues.

Texas will make a final decision in November. We have time to educate the state’s Board of Education on the importance of keeping Keller in the curriculum. Keller herself would urge people to stay optimistic: “Optimism is the faith that leads to achievement; nothing can be done without hope.”

Keller’s words have sparked movements in the past. Why not now?

No excuses!

Newark’s largest charter-school network suspends students with disabilities at a disproportionately high rate, violating their rights, according to a new complaint filed with the state.

The complaint alleges that North Star Academy gave suspensions to 29 percent of students with disabilities during the 2016-17 school year. The network disputes the complaint’s allegations and says the actual figure was 22 percent.

North Star removed students with disabilities from their classrooms for disciplinary reasons, including suspensions and expulsions, 269 times that school year, according to the complaint filed by an attorney at the Education & Health Law Clinic at Rutgers Law School in Newark. The complaint is based on state data and reports by parents who contacted the clinic.

Those numbers stand in sharp contrast to ones at Newark Public Schools, where students with disabilities were sent out for disciplinary reasons just 87 times that school year, according to state data. Overall, just 1.3 percent of special-education students and 1.1 percent of all students were suspended in 2016-17, according to the attorney’s analysis of state data. Excluding North Star, the city’s charter schools together suspended about 9 percent of students with disabilities, the analysis found…

North Star is part of the Uncommon Schools network — one of several large charter-school organizations whose reliance on strict discipline and demanding academics is sometimes called “no excuses.” Some of the schools have softened their discipline policies in recent years, but others have held firm, insisting that their no-nonsense approach to misbehavior creates a safe, orderly environment where students can focus on academics.

According to the complaint, North Star continues to take an exacting approach to managing behavior. Each week, students receive behavior points in the form of “paychecks.” They can lose points for even minor infractions, such as not paying attention in class or violating the school-uniform code. If their points dip below a certain level, they can be sent to detention or suspended, the complaint says.

The complaint alleges that some students with disabilities struggle to follow the rules, and wind up being punished at a higher rate than non-disabled students. Federal data from the 2014-15 school year appear to support that claim. In that year, students with disabilities made up 7.2 percent of North Star’s enrollment, yet they received 16.5 percent of in-school suspensions and 12.9 percent of out-of-school suspensions, according to data compiled by the U.S. Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights

Raise Your Hand for Public Education-Illinois has some excellent ideas about what should happen next in Chicago.

As you may know, we have been critical of many of the mayor’s education policies over the years, as they haven’t often aligned with our vision of an education system that is based on high-quality, researched-backed policies, centers on children’s curiosity and creativity, emphasizes collaborative learning environments instead of competition, and provides crucial social-emotional and health supports alongside academics.

We’ve also been critical of how those policies have been decided and rolled out; rather than encouraging debate, engaging families, students, teachers, and communities in a robust process to provide input, and seeking consensus beforehand, the mayor’s office has frequently sought only a post-hoc rubber stamp from the Board for decisions about CPS.

So these are some of the things we’ll be looking out for:

Funding: Budgets are a set of priorities. What are the essentials that have been cut over the years, or were never funded, and how will the next mayor fund these things? Will a candidate end the damaging student-based budgeting (SBB) system? SBB contributes to an accelerated death cycle for schools with decreasing enrollment, distorts hiring practices to favor the least-experienced teachers, and forces schools to eliminate librarians, art, and music to cut costs. And how will the next mayor work to get increased revenue to the schools?

School ratings: Test scores and attendance are the primary factors used to rate elementary schools. These ratings drive a lot of bad practice inside schools. How will the next mayor change this?

Overemphasis on test scores: Linked to above issue. Skill-drill test prep must be replaced with authentic learning environments. This requires time for serious professional development and planning! PD and planning time have been cut dramatically under this mayor to make room for the longer unfunded day. When teachers can’t collaborate, schools can’t improve. Test prep is not a good practice to improve learning.

Privatization: Charter schools have proliferated in areas of declining enrollment, and the mayor accelerated outsourcing of critical positions in the school building. CPS has also engaged in a new partnership with Mark Zuckerberg where private student data will likely be handed over to the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative LLC. How will the negative impacts of this be addressed and outsourcing reversed? Is a candidate willing to fight the continuation of IL’s tax credit scholarship program when it is up for renewal in 5 years?

Community: Schools should be community anchors. A number of schools with lottery-based or test-score based admissions have been added to the CPS “portfolio” over the past eight years. How can schools function as community hubs when there are so many barriers to access? How will facilities decisions be made to decrease race and class segregation rather than further entrench it in our divided city?

Wrap-around supports: CPS ratio of clinicians to students is grossly inadequate. The recommended ratio for students to social workers is 1:250 in districts without high poverty. In CPS the ratio is 1:1250. Will increasing clinician positions be a priority for the next mayor?

Early childhood ed: Rahm announced a new plan recently, but we are hearing from parents that there is a lot of chaos in the current system. We plan to do some listening tours with parents this year to find out what’s going on. Candidates should explain how new preschool programs will be funded and whether expanding services for one age group will mean reduction in services for another.

Special ed: CPS’s deliberate diversion of resources away from special education resulted in the state taking over special ed. How will the next mayor instruct CPS to systemically correct this debacle and to work with the ISBE monitor?

Elected school board: We believe that checks and balances, transparency and accountability are crucial in moving the school system to a better place. We need a Board of Education that’s directly accountable to the public at the ballot box and one whose deliberation of issues doesn’t take place behind closed doors. Where do the candidates stand on a fully elected, representative school board for Chicago?

So there’s a lot of research for everyone to do, and obviously education is only one area to focus on when determining who to vote for. Stay informed, stay involved, go to candidate forums, do your homework!

And attend our annual fundraiser, Raise a Glass for RYH, on October 2 to talk with us about all the important education issues facing our schools!

Happy school year, all.

An editorial in the Houston Chronicle brings up to date the story of Texas’ failure to pay the cost of educating students with disabilities.

“Imagine being a teacher and told not to bother trying to help a child who is having difficulty learning. That was happening routinely in Texas public schools before the legislature was shamed into eliminating an 8.5 percent cap the state had placed on special education enrollment.

“The federal Department of Education in January told the Texas Education Agency that the “target” it first imposed in 2004 violated federal laws requiring schools to serve all students. The cap wasn’t just illegal, it was morally reprehensible and shortsighted.

“The cap limited the aspirations of students with learning disabilities who didn’t get the help they needed, and shortchanged the state’s future by inadequately educating thousands of its children.

“The cap’s impact was reported last year in the Chronicle’s investigative series “Denied,” which pointed out that Houston had imposed an even more draconian 8 percent target for special education enrollment. “It became a nightmare,” said Attucks Middle School teacher Thomas Iocca.

“It’s a nightmare that won’t end any time soon for students who lost precious years of federally mandated assistance and interventions that could have helped them learn.”

Meanwhile, lawmakers are left with a fiscal headache as they try to find an additional $3.2 billion to spend on special education over the next three years to serve students previously denied assistance. Removing the cap is expected to add 189,000 special education students to public school rolls statewide.

Maybe the state should tap the nearly $11 billion Rainy Day Fund it’s been sitting on. Other issues need more cash too, including unpaid bills from Hurricane Harvey, Medicaid and an underfunded employee pension fund. But special education must be a top priority.

Leonie Haimson reports here on a federal court decision to allow a lawsuit to proceed against Success Academy.

https://nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com/2018/08/federal-court-rules-lawsuit-vs-success.html

“This week, a federal judge in Brooklyn ruled that a lawsuit vs Success Academy could go forward to trial on behalf of some of the children who were on the “Got to go” list put together by the principal of Success Academy Fort Greene, Candido Brown. These children were subsequently pushed out out of the school.The decision is here.

“While the school claims they simply made “errors in judgement,” the practice of repeatedly suspending kids and calling ACS on their parents if they don’t pick them up promptly in the middle of the school day is a common practice at Success, used to persuade parents to pull their children out of the school. Other methods commonly used by the school include calling the police to take unruly children either to the precinct house or to a hospital emergency room.”

She also notes:

“Meanwhile, NYSED reported today that last year it had overpaid charter schools and underpaid NYC from federal Title II funds. The spreadsheet is here, revealing that Success charter schools were overpaid by $1.5 million; and NYC public schools underpaid by $7.1 million, which will only be repaid slowly over four years.”

You might want to remember this statistic the next time you hear a Reformer claim that charter schools enroll the same demographic as public schools.

In Detroit, the public schools are 22 times more likely to enroll children with autism than are charter schools.

The charter schools have to protect their test scores, so they don’t want those children.

Franklin Towne Charter High School in Philadelphia has been accused of discrimination against a student with disabilities, reports Greg Windle in The Notebook.

Pamela James was thrilled when her granddaughter was accepted at Franklin Towne Charter High School. Her granddaughter raced off to tell friends the good news, and James gave the school a copy of her granddaughter’s Individual Education Plan (IEP), which included the need for emotional support — a common but relatively expensive requirement among students in Philly schools.

Hours later they were both shaken when James got a call from the Northeast Philadelphia school, informing her that her granddaughter could not attend as a result of her emotional disturbance diagnosis, that the class she needed was “full” and that the school would not accommodate her.

“After I took her IEP to the school, that’s when they shot me down,” James said. “That was really ugly discrimination.”

James was furious. No one at the school would return her calls, though she eventually received a brief letter restating that her daughter could not attend.

“I don’t understand how they’re able to do this,” James said. “They decided to change their mind because she needed emotional support.”

At that point, James did not know it is illegal to deny a student attendance at a public school based on their special education status. But she would soon find out. The Education Law Center of Philadelphia has since taken up her cause, sending an open complaint letter to the schools’ lawyer.

The article includes a graph created by the Education Law Center that shows the stark disparity between Philadelphia’s public schools and its charter schools in enrolling students with disabilities.

The only type of disability where charters accept the same proportion of students as public schools is “speech or language impairment.”

On every other type of disability, the contrast is dramatic. The public schools enroll more than 90% of students who are blind and nearly 90% of those who are deaf. The proportions accepted by charter schools are tiny. Eighty percent of students with autism are in public schools, 20% in charters.

Let us all be grateful to organizations like the Education Law Center. Without them, many students would have rights that are not enforced.