If you were in charge of FCPS, what budget cuts would you make?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no way you would know how many kids in a class an aide was covering *unless you were a teacher who had seen a child's IEP*. There are children with IEPs who need 1:1 support sometimes or in certain situations. A child could have ADHD or emotional problems or health problems that you don't know about and the aide could be there to help several children as needed.

My last K class (2 years ago), I had 30 kids. One had Downs and needed a lot of help with daily acitivities (was not toilet trained, could not feed himself). The aide seemed like she was just for him but there were also 3 other children with IEPs in that class who she was "covering". One of these children needed a lot of support and ended up transferring to a special school. The aide was stretched very thin. This is just one example.

As a parent of a Special Ed student, in ES- you do know who is being covered. You see the same parents in the Special Ed classroom during back to school night. You know who is in your child's reading group or math group. If you volunteer in the classroom, you know who leaves with the aide during language arts or math. Parents talk with each other, compare notes and help support each other. You go on field trips and you know which child has a one to one aide. You go the special education parents group sponsored by the PTA and learn more. Years go by, you learn more. If you pay attention, you end up knowing quite a bit, of course you don't know everything. I think it is a good thing. It means we are not out in the wilderness alone and we can support each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why on earth are there so many SPED kids now?

It was a blip. The grades before and after had enough for one aide and one special ed teacher and they had more kids. We were trying to figure out why our kids had such a high prevalence, but in the end it seems to be a statisical blip/cluster that happens every so often. When they got the MS, their grade (combined with the other 5 or so schools) was not so "out there". As I said, It was a very unusual co-hort.

No, why are there so many SPED kids now in general? Whether it's "attention problems," autism, "spectrum issues," and so forth. We did not have this when we were growing up. And don't say "It just wasn't diagnosed." There were so many kids functionally normally at that time, the SPED kids truly were "special," as in there weren't so many of them. What is happening? Food additives? Environmental issues? Maternal nutrition? What is it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no way you would know how many kids in a class an aide was covering *unless you were a teacher who had seen a child's IEP*. There are children with IEPs who need 1:1 support sometimes or in certain situations. A child could have ADHD or emotional problems or health problems that you don't know about and the aide could be there to help several children as needed.

My last K class (2 years ago), I had 30 kids. One had Downs and needed a lot of help with daily acitivities (was not toilet trained, could not feed himself). The aide seemed like she was just for him but there were also 3 other children with IEPs in that class who she was "covering". One of these children needed a lot of support and ended up transferring to a special school. The aide was stretched very thin. This is just one example.

You would know if the kid comes in the classroom with his aide, the aide sits with him and helps only him, and leaves with just him when he goes to other subjects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why on earth are there so many SPED kids now?

It was a blip. The grades before and after had enough for one aide and one special ed teacher and they had more kids. We were trying to figure out why our kids had such a high prevalence, but in the end it seems to be a statisical blip/cluster that happens every so often. When they got the MS, their grade (combined with the other 5 or so schools) was not so "out there". As I said, It was a very unusual co-hort.

No, why are there so many SPED kids now in general? Whether it's "attention problems," autism, "spectrum issues," and so forth. We did not have this when we were growing up. And don't say "It just wasn't diagnosed." There were so many kids functionally normally at that time, the SPED kids truly were "special," as in there weren't so many of them. What is happening? Food additives? Environmental issues? Maternal nutrition? What is it?

I don't know what to say if you will not accept the answer. My son has dyslexia and dysgraphia, in the past he would have been tracked on the tech route for electricians and mechanics. Now, they know how to remedy and accomodate the issues and he can access the highest level curriculum that his intelligence allows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why on earth are there so many SPED kids now?

It was a blip. The grades before and after had enough for one aide and one special ed teacher and they had more kids. We were trying to figure out why our kids had such a high prevalence, but in the end it seems to be a statisical blip/cluster that happens every so often. When they got the MS, their grade (combined with the other 5 or so schools) was not so "out there". As I said, It was a very unusual co-hort.

No, why are there so many SPED kids now in general? Whether it's "attention problems," autism, "spectrum issues," and so forth. We did not have this when we were growing up. And don't say "It just wasn't diagnosed." There were so many kids functionally normally at that time, the SPED kids truly were "special," as in there weren't so many of them. What is happening? Food additives? Environmental issues? Maternal nutrition? What is it?

I don't know what to say if you will not accept the answer. My son has dyslexia and dysgraphia, in the past he would have been tracked on the tech route for electricians and mechanics. Now, they know how to remedy and accomodate the issues and he can access the highest level curriculum that his intelligence allows.

You are actually talking to a couple of different posters.

I am not the person you just responded to, but I have posted a couple of times.

Whether the increased aides to support inclusion is a good thing for individual students, you cannot deny that it is a budget buster for the school districts.

My kid's class had a student with a one/one aid support. The aide went with the student from class to class, sat with only that student, and worked with only that student. I saw this kid in several non-school activities, and he was able to function quite well without one/one support with just a little extra guidance, but he needed--for reasons that are none of my business---one/one support at school. Lets say his aide fell into the middle of the pay grade for fcps aides. That means the district was paying around $30K, plus benefits, plus payroll taxes for just one student. There is also the normal cost/student that the district puts out for all the students. Is the district paying $40K to educate that one student? $50K? Multiply that aide's cost with all the other aides who are not there for the severely disabled students, and the cost is astronomical.

There has to be a better way to provide a least restrictive environment without raising costs to $40-50K per special ed (aide required) student per year.

I am sorry, but the cost is too high.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why on earth are there so many SPED kids now?

It was a blip. The grades before and after had enough for one aide and one special ed teacher and they had more kids. We were trying to figure out why our kids had such a high prevalence, but in the end it seems to be a statisical blip/cluster that happens every so often. When they got the MS, their grade (combined with the other 5 or so schools) was not so "out there". As I said, It was a very unusual co-hort.

No, why are there so many SPED kids now in general? Whether it's "attention problems," autism, "spectrum issues," and so forth. We did not have this when we were growing up. And don't say "It just wasn't diagnosed." There were so many kids functionally normally at that time, the SPED kids truly were "special," as in there weren't so many of them. What is happening? Food additives? Environmental issues? Maternal nutrition? What is it?

I don't know what to say if you will not accept the answer. My son has dyslexia and dysgraphia, in the past he would have been tracked on the tech route for electricians and mechanics. Now, they know how to remedy and accomodate the issues and he can access the highest level curriculum that his intelligence allows.

You are actually talking to a couple of different posters.

I am not the person you just responded to, but I have posted a couple of times.

Whether the increased aides to support inclusion is a good thing for individual students, you cannot deny that it is a budget buster for the school districts.

My kid's class had a student with a one/one aid support. The aide went with the student from class to class, sat with only that student, and worked with only that student. I saw this kid in several non-school activities, and he was able to function quite well without one/one support with just a little extra guidance, but he needed--for reasons that are none of my business---one/one support at school. Lets say his aide fell into the middle of the pay grade for fcps aides. That means the district was paying around $30K, plus benefits, plus payroll taxes for just one student. There is also the normal cost/student that the district puts out for all the students. Is the district paying $40K to educate that one student? $50K? Multiply that aide's cost with all the other aides who are not there for the severely disabled students, and the cost is astronomical.

There has to be a better way to provide a least restrictive environment without raising costs to $40-50K per special ed (aide required) student per year.

I am sorry, but the cost is too high.

It sounds like the child in your example would have to have a one on one aide no matter where they were in school or that they would have to be in the different school. I don't see how that would reduce the budget. What is your solution for the education of such students? Yes, children with special needs cost more. Perhaps you think that is unfair. Try being in the shoes of the parents of that child and see if you think that is still unfair that more public money is spent on their child. I can assure that they are also coping with additional private costs that you do not have. Are you willing to help out with those? You know, to be fair, since your child costs you less.

For some, the additional cost means that they will be trained/educated to become responsible contributing members of society. Much cheaper for society, in the long run, than not training/educating them and having them be supported by society fort he entirely of their lives. For the ones who cannot become independent ever, education can get them closer and require fewer services. For those for whom even that isn't possible, it will cost society for their entire lives. Unless, you are suggesting someone requiring that they not be born in the first place, I don't see how you can avoid the additional costs.

To sum up, the children need teachers/aides no matter where they sit- in a classroom with GE or in a separate Special Ed classroom. I don't see how least restrictive environment adds costs.

[Anonymous]

People say inclusion is cheaper. I don't have the documentation either way. Federal laws though are the requirements for these teachers, not FCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People say inclusion is cheaper. I don't have the documentation either way. Federal laws though are the requirements for these teachers, not FCPS.

Maybe federal tax dollars should pay for it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why on earth are there so many SPED kids now?

It was a blip. The grades before and after had enough for one aide and one special ed teacher and they had more kids. We were trying to figure out why our kids had such a high prevalence, but in the end it seems to be a statisical blip/cluster that happens every so often. When they got the MS, their grade (combined with the other 5 or so schools) was not so "out there". As I said, It was a very unusual co-hort.

No, why are there so many SPED kids now in general? Whether it's "attention problems," autism, "spectrum issues," and so forth. We did not have this when we were growing up. And don't say "It just wasn't diagnosed." There were so many kids functionally normally at that time, the SPED kids truly were "special," as in there weren't so many of them. What is happening? Food additives? Environmental issues? Maternal nutrition? What is it?

I don't know what to say if you will not accept the answer. My son has dyslexia and dysgraphia, in the past he would have been tracked on the tech route for electricians and mechanics. Now, they know how to remedy and accomodate the issues and he can access the highest level curriculum that his intelligence allows.

You are actually talking to a couple of different posters.

I am not the person you just responded to, but I have posted a couple of times.

Whether the increased aides to support inclusion is a good thing for individual students, you cannot deny that it is a budget buster for the school districts.

My kid's class had a student with a one/one aid support. The aide went with the student from class to class, sat with only that student, and worked with only that student. I saw this kid in several non-school activities, and he was able to function quite well without one/one support with just a little extra guidance, but he needed--for reasons that are none of my business---one/one support at school. Lets say his aide fell into the middle of the pay grade for fcps aides. That means the district was paying around $30K, plus benefits, plus payroll taxes for just one student. There is also the normal cost/student that the district puts out for all the students. Is the district paying $40K to educate that one student? $50K? Multiply that aide's cost with all the other aides who are not there for the severely disabled students, and the cost is astronomical.

There has to be a better way to provide a least restrictive environment without raising costs to $40-50K per special ed (aide required) student per year.

I am sorry, but the cost is too high.

It sounds like the child in your example would have to have a one on one aide no matter where they were in school or that they would have to be in the different school. I don't see how that would reduce the budget. What is your solution for the education of such students? Yes, children with special needs cost more. Perhaps you think that is unfair. Try being in the shoes of the parents of that child and see if you think that is still unfair that more public money is spent on their child. I can assure that they are also coping with additional private costs that you do not have. Are you willing to help out with those? You know, to be fair, since your child costs you less.

For some, the additional cost means that they will be trained/educated to become responsible contributing members of society. Much cheaper for society, in the long run, than not training/educating them and having them be supported by society fort he entirely of their lives. For the ones who cannot become independent ever, education can get them closer and require fewer services. For those for whom even that isn't possible, it will cost society for their entire lives. Unless, you are suggesting someone requiring that they not be born in the first place, I don't see how you can avoid the additional costs.

To sum up, the children need teachers/aides no matter where they sit- in a classroom with GE or in a separate Special Ed classroom. I don't see how least restrictive environment adds costs.

I think you are over reacting. I never said it was a bad idea to go for the least restrictive environment for students. I actually think it is a good idea, and a benefit for society.

However, just because the intention of the idea is a positive, it does not mean the implementation is a good thing.

The only thing that is unfair is to say that a program which drains so much in financial resources, 5-10 x more money than it costs to educate any given student, from a district that is strapped for cash cannot even be looked at to see if there is a better, more cost effective way of doing things. There has to be a better way.

In the case I mentioned above, what people see is a kid who functions well without one on one supervision at parties, at sports, at activities, who also behaves very well in class, interacts "normally" with classmates and who does not have any visible disabilities (downs syndrome, tics, hearing/vision loss, etc) is receiving one/one aid support. Anyone who is not emotionally vested in that child will look objectively and think, is there a better way the district can service this child? It also makes one wonder if that child gets one/one support, how many others are getting it as well, who might actually do okay with an aide who works with several children.

To say that the aide program at fcps cannot even be looked at, evaluated, and restructured because "it's not fair that my child is not typical" is unrealistic and dare I say a bit selfish.

It is a very expensive program benefiting a limited number of students. What is wrong with asking if it can be done better, more effectively and less expensively?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think you are over reacting. I never said it was a bad idea to go for the least restrictive environment for students. I actually think it is a good idea, and a benefit for society.

However, just because the intention of the idea is a positive, it does not mean the implementation is a good thing.

The only thing that is unfair is to say that a program which drains so much in financial resources, 5-10 x more money than it costs to educate any given student, from a district that is strapped for cash cannot even be looked at to see if there is a better, more cost effective way of doing things. There has to be a better way.

In the case I mentioned above, what people see is a kid who functions well without one on one supervision at parties, at sports, at activities, who also behaves very well in class, interacts "normally" with classmates and who does not have any visible disabilities (downs syndrome, tics, hearing/vision loss, etc) is receiving one/one aid support. Anyone who is not emotionally vested in that child will look objectively and think, is there a better way the district can service this child? It also makes one wonder if that child gets one/one support, how many others are getting it as well, who might actually do okay with an aide who works with several children.

To say that the aide program at fcps cannot even be looked at, evaluated, and restructured because "it's not fair that my child is not typical" is unrealistic and dare I say a bit selfish.

It is a very expensive program benefiting a limited number of students. What is wrong with asking if it can be done better, more effectively and less expensively?

Well said. This and other questions surely need to be asked.

[Anonymous]

13:11 And we all know how many of those dollars are around. I think currently the feds fund some of this and the state and local governments fund the rest.

[Anonymous]

Student Membership: 184,625
Special Ed Level 2 and Preschool 15,408
ESOL Membership* 29,723 *Does not include kindergarten students
Special Ed Unduplicated Count 25,425
Students Eligible for Free or Reduced Price Meals 49,295

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People say inclusion is cheaper. I don't have the documentation either way. Federal laws though are the requirements for these teachers, not FCPS.

Maybe federal tax dollars should pay for it

Federal dollars are supposed to pay for it, but never have. The federal special education requirements are among the many "unfunded mandates" from Washington. I have no problem with the requirements (I was a special ed teacher) but states and local districts have always had to meet these requirements without all the money that was initially promised when the law was passed more than 30 years ago. I suspect this will always be the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People say inclusion is cheaper. I don't have the documentation either way. Federal laws though are the requirements for these teachers, not FCPS.

Maybe federal tax dollars should pay for it

Federal dollars are supposed to pay for it, but never have. The federal special education requirements are among the many "unfunded mandates" from Washington. I have no problem with the requirements (I was a special ed teacher) but states and local districts have always had to meet these requirements without all the money that was initially promised when the law was passed more than 30 years ago. I suspect this will always be the case.

30 years ago the special ed population was not anywhere near what it is now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why on earth are there so many SPED kids now?

It was a blip. The grades before and after had enough for one aide and one special ed teacher and they had more kids. We were trying to figure out why our kids had such a high prevalence, but in the end it seems to be a statisical blip/cluster that happens every so often. When they got the MS, their grade (combined with the other 5 or so schools) was not so "out there". As I said, It was a very unusual co-hort.

No, why are there so many SPED kids now in general? Whether it's "attention problems," autism, "spectrum issues," and so forth. We did not have this when we were growing up. And don't say "It just wasn't diagnosed." There were so many kids functionally normally at that time, the SPED kids truly were "special," as in there weren't so many of them. What is happening? Food additives? Environmental issues? Maternal nutrition? What is it?

I don't know what to say if you will not accept the answer. My son has dyslexia and dysgraphia, in the past he would have been tracked on the tech route for electricians and mechanics. Now, they know how to remedy and accomodate the issues and he can access the highest level curriculum that his intelligence allows.

You are actually talking to a couple of different posters.

I am not the person you just responded to, but I have posted a couple of times.

Whether the increased aides to support inclusion is a good thing for individual students, you cannot deny that it is a budget buster for the school districts.

My kid's class had a student with a one/one aid support. The aide went with the student from class to class, sat with only that student, and worked with only that student. I saw this kid in several non-school activities, and he was able to function quite well without one/one support with just a little extra guidance, but he needed--for reasons that are none of my business---one/one support at school. Lets say his aide fell into the middle of the pay grade for fcps aides. That means the district was paying around $30K, plus benefits, plus payroll taxes for just one student. There is also the normal cost/student that the district puts out for all the students. Is the district paying $40K to educate that one student? $50K? Multiply that aide's cost with all the other aides who are not there for the severely disabled students, and the cost is astronomical.

There has to be a better way to provide a least restrictive environment without raising costs to $40-50K per special ed (aide required) student per year.

I am sorry, but the cost is too high.

It sounds like the child in your example would have to have a one on one aide no matter where they were in school or that they would have to be in the different school. I don't see how that would reduce the budget. What is your solution for the education of such students? Yes, children with special needs cost more. Perhaps you think that is unfair. Try being in the shoes of the parents of that child and see if you think that is still unfair that more public money is spent on their child. I can assure that they are also coping with additional private costs that you do not have. Are you willing to help out with those? You know, to be fair, since your child costs you less.

For some, the additional cost means that they will be trained/educated to become responsible contributing members of society. Much cheaper for society, in the long run, than not training/educating them and having them be supported by society fort he entirely of their lives. For the ones who cannot become independent ever, education can get them closer and require fewer services. For those for whom even that isn't possible, it will cost society for their entire lives. Unless, you are suggesting someone requiring that they not be born in the first place, I don't see how you can avoid the additional costs.

To sum up, the children need teachers/aides no matter where they sit- in a classroom with GE or in a separate Special Ed classroom. I don't see how least restrictive environment adds costs.

I think you are over reacting. I never said it was a bad idea to go for the least restrictive environment for students. I actually think it is a good idea, and a benefit for society.

However, just because the intention of the idea is a positive, it does not mean the implementation is a good thing.

The only thing that is unfair is to say that a program which drains so much in financial resources, 5-10 x more money than it costs to educate any given student, from a district that is strapped for cash cannot even be looked at to see if there is a better, more cost effective way of doing things. There has to be a better way.

In the case I mentioned above, what people see is a kid who functions well without one on one supervision at parties, at sports, at activities, who also behaves very well in class, interacts "normally" with classmates and who does not have any visible disabilities (downs syndrome, tics, hearing/vision loss, etc) is receiving one/one aid support. Anyone who is not emotionally vested in that child will look objectively and think, is there a better way the district can service this child? It also makes one wonder if that child gets one/one support, how many others are getting it as well, who might actually do okay with an aide who works with several children.

To say that the aide program at fcps cannot even be looked at, evaluated, and restructured because "it's not fair that my child is not typical" is unrealistic and dare I say a bit selfish.

It is a very expensive program benefiting a limited number of students. What is wrong with asking if it can be done better, more effectively and less expensively?

It seems to me that you have decided that you, a random parent of another child in the school who has limited contact with the child and no real knowledge of the child's issues, is able to make a better decision than an IEP team that has knowledge specific to the child's issues and experience and knowledge of the strategies and methodologies pertaining to those issues, including his parents who have know him since birth. That strikes me as incredibly arrogant. You don't know what you don't know.

I am sorry, I can't get past that.