Clustering of special Ed kids in gen Ed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

Private schools are always an option for parents who do not agree with the laws that govern public education.

When the answer to a parent asking why their gen ed student's school year is derailed so that other students get their needs met is don't be poor, don't be surprised when resentment is the result.

You still have choice: public, private, and homeschool.

Badgering principals to get out of inclusion classes works to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

Private schools are always an option for parents who do not agree with the laws that govern public education.

When the answer to a parent asking why their gen ed student's school year is derailed so that other students get their needs met is don't be poor, don't be surprised when resentment is the result.

it's the law. take it up with the supreme court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

Private schools are always an option for parents who do not agree with the laws that govern public education.

When the answer to a parent asking why their gen ed student's school year is derailed so that other students get their needs met is don't be poor, don't be surprised when resentment is the result.

it's the law. take it up with the supreme court.

FAPE is the law, but which students have to push in is up to the principal. It's very much a case of being a squeeky wheel

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

Private schools are always an option for parents who do not agree with the laws that govern public education.

When the answer to a parent asking why their gen ed student's school year is derailed so that other students get their needs met is don't be poor, don't be surprised when resentment is the result.

it's the law. take it up with the supreme court.

FAPE is the law, but which students have to push in is up to the principal. It's very much a case of being a squeeky wheel

True, but if the squeaky wheel doesn't get the grease...there's really not much you can do besides pull your kid from the school (and then your options would be to put them in private or homeschool). I'm not sure what else you there is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

There are laws for gifted services, this AAP, Honors, IB, DE, AP, etc.

There are State laws, not Federal, and the law really doesn't do much for kids who are Advanced or Gifted. AAP is not enough for kids who are legit gifted. AAP is great for kids who are ahead in ES ad need to have a bit of a challenge but it is not a Gifted program. And AAP is inconsistent across the County.

And let's face it, many parents want to get their kids into AAP because they think that it will get them away from classroom behavior issues. Although I know people in AAP who report plenty of issues in their AAP classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At our school they seem to put all the special Ed kids in one Gen Ed class. It’s not fair to the other regular kids who get placed in with that group. The class is usually poorly behaved and the teacher is overwhelmed. This is called clustering and I thought this practice was outdated and frowned upon. Why are elementary schools clustering special Ed kids now in one class instead of spreading them out among 3 different Gen Ed classes? Can parents request for their child not to be put in the special Ed class?

And you know this because…?

DP here...Uh have you never volunteered in your school? I volunteer for lunch, in the classroom, grade wide parties. Yes, there is an aide but there is only so much they can do. You have 4-5 special ed kids some with severe emotional management issues, some who really aren't getting the curriculum etc etc. And one aide trying to put out fires, catch fires before they spread and keep this kids somewhat engaged. Meanwhile as these repeated and loud disturbances happen the teacher is trying to keep the rest of the class focused. It does breed resentment among parents and the students. My DS in 3rd grade can't stand the disruptions, the random shouting, singing, anger outbursts. As the teacher has to help the aide get these kids under control the rest of the class is left to twiddle their thumbs. We requested not to be put in an inclusion classroom. I don't see how it's fair that a handful of kids get to derail the education of the majority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

There are laws for gifted services, this AAP, Honors, IB, DE, AP, etc.

There are State laws, not Federal, and the law really doesn't do much for kids who are Advanced or Gifted. AAP is not enough for kids who are legit gifted. AAP is great for kids who are ahead in ES ad need to have a bit of a challenge but it is not a Gifted program. And AAP is inconsistent across the County.

And let's face it, many parents want to get their kids into AAP because they think that it will get them away from classroom behavior issues. Although I know people in AAP who report plenty of issues in their AAP classes.

AAP is plenty. My son, the one with behavior issues, got sent to MS in ES for math and then he went to TJ. If your child is truly gifted, the school will accommodate them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

There are laws for gifted services, this AAP, Honors, IB, DE, AP, etc.

There are State laws, not Federal, and the law really doesn't do much for kids who are Advanced or Gifted. AAP is not enough for kids who are legit gifted. AAP is great for kids who are ahead in ES ad need to have a bit of a challenge but it is not a Gifted program. And AAP is inconsistent across the County.

And let's face it, many parents want to get their kids into AAP because they think that it will get them away from classroom behavior issues. Although I know people in AAP who report plenty of issues in their AAP classes.

AAP is plenty. My son, the one with behavior issues, got sent to MS in ES for math and then he went to TJ. If your child is truly gifted, the school will accommodate them.

Not every ES has LIV. LLIV is widely different from school to school, my kids school uses a cluster model which means that the LIV kids are getting little to nothing because the Teacher is trying to get the kids who are a grade level behind up to grade level. Many ES do nothing to promote kids up in subjects like Math, even when the kid is demonstrably ahead. I had a Teacher at my sons school question why anyone would want their kid to take Algebra in 7th grade never mind earlier. There are plenty of schools where the LIV program is not enough and a lot of that has to do with the attitudes of the Teachers and Admin at the school.

We choose to stay at the base knowing that there are issues with staying there and we are fine with that decision. But there are some huge issues with AAP, how kids are admitted, and how the program is run. It has some serious flaws, just like the SPED program has issues. But there are legal requirements for SPED programs that do not exist for AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

There are laws for gifted services, this AAP, Honors, IB, DE, AP, etc.

There are State laws, not Federal, and the law really doesn't do much for kids who are Advanced or Gifted. AAP is not enough for kids who are legit gifted. AAP is great for kids who are ahead in ES ad need to have a bit of a challenge but it is not a Gifted program. And AAP is inconsistent across the County.

And let's face it, many parents want to get their kids into AAP because they think that it will get them away from classroom behavior issues. Although I know people in AAP who report plenty of issues in their AAP classes.

AAP is plenty. My son, the one with behavior issues, got sent to MS in ES for math and then he went to TJ. If your child is truly gifted, the school will accommodate them.

Not every ES has LIV. LLIV is widely different from school to school, my kids school uses a cluster model which means that the LIV kids are getting little to nothing because the Teacher is trying to get the kids who are a grade level behind up to grade level. Many ES do nothing to promote kids up in subjects like Math, even when the kid is demonstrably ahead. I had a Teacher at my sons school question why anyone would want their kid to take Algebra in 7th grade never mind earlier. There are plenty of schools where the LIV program is not enough and a lot of that has to do with the attitudes of the Teachers and Admin at the school.

We choose to stay at the base knowing that there are issues with staying there and we are fine with that decision. But there are some huge issues with AAP, how kids are admitted, and how the program is run. It has some serious flaws, just like the SPED program has issues. But there are legal requirements for SPED programs that do not exist for AAP.

But you decided to stay at the base school knowing that the class is mixed. At center, the entire class is advanced and they further separate by abilities in math. You can't expect the mixed class to offer the same program as the center, hence why the center is different. So yes, AAP is plenty, you just have to take advantage of the opportunities. At center, the vast majority, if not all of the kids take Algebra 1 in 7th, and mine and several others went to Longfellow for Algebra 1 in 6th grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

Private schools are always an option for parents who do not agree with the laws that govern public education.

When the answer to a parent asking why their gen ed student's school year is derailed so that other students get their needs met is don't be poor, don't be surprised when resentment is the result.

it's the law. take it up with the supreme court.

FAPE is the law, but which students have to push in is up to the principal. It's very much a case of being a squeeky wheel

True, but if the squeaky wheel doesn't get the grease...there's really not much you can do besides pull your kid from the school (and then your options would be to put them in private or homeschool). I'm not sure what else you there is.

If you child is on the receiving end of out bursts, bulling complaints. If the nice girls are the ones who get put at the table, title IX complaint to the county. None of it is really a winning issue, but all of it is paperwork for the principal and you can make it constant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The best years my gen Ed kid has had have been in inclusion classrooms. The unfounded judgment of kids with IEPs is disgusting.

It's not unfounded for many kids in these inclusive classrooms who have had very negative, even traumatic experiences.

My kid had to see a therapist for anxiety related to going to school in her inclusive class. Why? Because two students in the class regularly had meltdowns that caused the classroom to be evacuated. These meltdowns included lots of yelling, throwing items, and in a few cases, outright assault on the teacher and aide.

It got to the point where their class was evacuating the classroom weekly. The one student's behavior just got more and more destructive to the point where he trashed a classroom one time and the kids had to finish out the day in neighboring classrooms.

That's UNACCEPTABLE behavior for anyone. My kid shouldn't have been scared of going to school because of two students who, and I will just keep it real, are never going to amount to anything. One student is mostly nonverbal with significant delays. I cannot think of any job that he can do in his future. It's sad, but it is what it is.

When I was in school, these types of students were in their own classrooms. That's how it should be. If you're a disruptive student, you don't get to be mainstreamed.

Why didn’t you ask for a classroom switch?

We did. We even had the doctor recommendation but too many people requested one so they did not accommodate any.

That was the 2019/2020 school year, so the pandemic happened and school was closed and then virtual. 2020/2021 she did fully virtual. This is her first year back in a classroom and we switched to a private. She's much happier and doesn't sit and worry in class when a student is going to have an outburst or possibly throw something at the class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The best years my gen Ed kid has had have been in inclusion classrooms. The unfounded judgment of kids with IEPs is disgusting.

It's not unfounded for many kids in these inclusive classrooms who have had very negative, even traumatic experiences.

My kid had to see a therapist for anxiety related to going to school in her inclusive class. Why? Because two students in the class regularly had meltdowns that caused the classroom to be evacuated. These meltdowns included lots of yelling, throwing items, and in a few cases, outright assault on the teacher and aide.

It got to the point where their class was evacuating the classroom weekly. The one student's behavior just got more and more destructive to the point where he trashed a classroom one time and the kids had to finish out the day in neighboring classrooms.

That's UNACCEPTABLE behavior for anyone. My kid shouldn't have been scared of going to school because of two students who, and I will just keep it real, are never going to amount to anything. One student is mostly nonverbal with significant delays. I cannot think of any job that he can do in his future. It's sad, but it is what it is.

When I was in school, these types of students were in their own classrooms. That's how it should be. If you're a disruptive student, you don't get to be mainstreamed.

Why didn’t you ask for a classroom switch?

We did. We even had the doctor recommendation but too many people requested one so they did not accommodate any.

That was the 2019/2020 school year, so the pandemic happened and school was closed and then virtual. 2020/2021 she did fully virtual. This is her first year back in a classroom and we switched to a private. She's much happier and doesn't sit and worry in class when a student is going to have an outburst or possibly throw something at the class.

You should have started the 504 process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The best years my gen Ed kid has had have been in inclusion classrooms. The unfounded judgment of kids with IEPs is disgusting.

It's not unfounded for many kids in these inclusive classrooms who have had very negative, even traumatic experiences.

My kid had to see a therapist for anxiety related to going to school in her inclusive class. Why? Because two students in the class regularly had meltdowns that caused the classroom to be evacuated. These meltdowns included lots of yelling, throwing items, and in a few cases, outright assault on the teacher and aide.

It got to the point where their class was evacuating the classroom weekly. The one student's behavior just got more and more destructive to the point where he trashed a classroom one time and the kids had to finish out the day in neighboring classrooms.

That's UNACCEPTABLE behavior for anyone. My kid shouldn't have been scared of going to school because of two students who, and I will just keep it real, are never going to amount to anything. One student is mostly nonverbal with significant delays. I cannot think of any job that he can do in his future. It's sad, but it is what it is.

When I was in school, these types of students were in their own classrooms. That's how it should be. If you're a disruptive student, you don't get to be mainstreamed.

Why didn’t you ask for a classroom switch?

We did. We even had the doctor recommendation but too many people requested one so they did not accommodate any.

That was the 2019/2020 school year, so the pandemic happened and school was closed and then virtual. 2020/2021 she did fully virtual. This is her first year back in a classroom and we switched to a private. She's much happier and doesn't sit and worry in class when a student is going to have an outburst or possibly throw something at the class.

You should have started the 504 process.

Heavens, no. PP would never tag her kid as one of the gross speds.

[Anonymous]

every kid with an IEP is different and I think it is unfair to all kids to have all the IEP kids in one classroom. No one is getting what they need with this scenario- especially the kids with the IEP. One of ours has an IEP and I had to fight this placement two years in a row.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At our school they seem to put all the special Ed kids in one Gen Ed class. It’s not fair to the other regular kids who get placed in with that group. The class is usually poorly behaved and the teacher is overwhelmed. This is called clustering and I thought this practice was outdated and frowned upon. Why are elementary schools clustering special Ed kids now in one class instead of spreading them out among 3 different Gen Ed classes? Can parents request for their child not to be put in the special Ed class?

And you know this because…?

DP here...Uh have you never volunteered in your school? I volunteer for lunch, in the classroom, grade wide parties. Yes, there is an aide but there is only so much they can do. You have 4-5 special ed kids some with severe emotional management issues, some who really aren't getting the curriculum etc etc. And one aide trying to put out fires, catch fires before they spread and keep this kids somewhat engaged. Meanwhile as these repeated and loud disturbances happen the teacher is trying to keep the rest of the class focused. It does breed resentment among parents and the students. My DS in 3rd grade can't stand the disruptions, the random shouting, singing, anger outbursts. As the teacher has to help the aide get these kids under control the rest of the class is left to twiddle their thumbs. We requested not to be put in an inclusion classroom. I don't see how it's fair that a handful of kids get to derail the education of the majority.

Do a have a suggestion besides for a separate school or classroom - because those are against the law?