At a loss with classroom behavior issues

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These two posts do t name the “epidemic” to which hey refer... what is the epidemic?

Sounds like they mean mental illness...but they’re being very drama queeny about it.

I think they are antivaxxers. See the infertility reference.

Oh, yeah, you’re probably right.

[Anonymous]

Many years ago in an FCPS 3rd grade, there was a child who caused all sorts of problems— easy examples included throwing a musical instrument at a music teacher, strangling another student on the playground and purposely throwing a book at my D — it hit her in the eye.

I picked her up and got an emergency eye appointment. It happened to be with an ophthalmologist who had his own (kids’) stories of classroom disruptions and dangers.

I held my D out of school for a week, while the admin danced. The assistant superintendent threatened me with truancy laws. This was in late March.

Eventually, they moved my child to another classroom. It game me some assurance of safety for my kid although it didn’t address the larger issue.

Two years later, I found that my child was again assigned to the same classroom as the difficult child. I loved the teacher but was wary about the assignment. I clearly told her, I didn’t intend to stand in the way of the boy’s learning, but I had zero tolerance for another dangerous situation. She managed it well.

The boy had very little discipline in his home life and hadn’t really learned to read. I believe that the 5th grade teacher made a difference.

So, FCPS didn’t really want to take on the problem until they were pushed to the wall — and they threatened me with truancy! Truly absurd. Other parents commended my actions but they didn’t publicly speak out. YMMV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another teacher here. I can tell you when parents start calling meeting with admin and making it clear a kid in class is having huge impact, that’s when they address it. Make clear the teacher is doing what they can but your son is still impacted negatively. I have seen this myself; we as teachers can’t do anything about their placement even if we say it’s impacting the other kids but when you get 3-4 parents getting loud about it, it moves the needle.

OP here. This is possibly what got this child moved into a new classroom—parents in his original classroom going to admin. Did not consider that before. So what do they do: just move kids with extreme behavior disruptions from classroom to classroom as infinitum? Why doesn’t a child who needs this much help regulating impulses and emotions have an aide? This must be such drain on teachers and also no real help to the child.

Why doesn't a child who needs this much help have an aide? 1) If a child is new to a school with no paperwork from an old school, new to the country or most often, new to school in general in kindergarten, a school cannot hold a domain meeting requesting an evaluation for 45 school days. 2) A crap ton of documentation and RTI has to happen before most evaluations will happen. 3) A 1:1 aide in a gen ed room, in my school at least, is considered the MOST restrictive environment, even more so than say being placed in an ED/BD room, that is possible. So schools don't like to use that option. 4) Aides are expensive. Districts don't like to pay for them 5) It is VERY difficult to find an aide to work with some of the kids who need them. When that aide has to follow a detailed BIP or crisis plan, it takes tremendous patience. It can also mean that aide putting themself in harm's way each day. How many people are just dying to get paid $11 an hour and get spit on or kicked? And then add in if you have a district that just doesn't want to deal with all this for one reason or the other? It means the kid in question doesn't get the help they need, the other kids and the staff suffers and it is a lose-lose situation.

OP here. I didn't know any of this--thank you. I didn't realize how hard it is for a child to be assigned an aide and how hard it is to find one. What is the answer here? A teacher already stretched thin with the demands of a full classroom, plus at least one or two kids whose needs and behavior dominate their attention--that feels terribly unfair to the teacher, the kids who need the extra assistance, and the rest of the class. My kid says the outburts are loud, sudden, and last a long time--he's on edge waiting for it, even when it isn't happening. I wonder how many other kids in the class feel the same? Not to mention all the hours of instruction interrupted.

Its life in public school. Not all kids are as perfect as yours. Most kids who need attention and supports don't get it and many of us pay a fortune privately in services or have to hire advocates or attorneys and basically sue. You can always transfer to a private.

He is not perfect. But he is also not throwing books across the room at other children and screaming daily at the top of his lungs while he kicks chairs. I don't have money for private school; is it unreasonable to expect that his needs are as important as any other child's?

No, it is an entirely reasonable expectation. Keep working at it OP. Ignore those who say you could go private. You shouldn't need to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These two posts do t name the “epidemic” to which hey refer... what is the epidemic?

Sounds like they mean mental illness...but they’re being very drama queeny about it.

I think they are antivaxxers. See the infertility reference.

Oh, yeah, you’re probably right.

I said the infertility reference because it's the one thing that people on this board seem to be able to comprehend. People are either pregnant or they're not. You can't be in denial about it and you can't pretend and you can't negotiate and you can't change the definition.

If you're asking whether I think all vaccines are a great idea for all kids in all cases, the answer is no. If you're asking whether some vaccines are a great idea in some cases, the answer is yes. But I (personally) was referring to much more than vaccines.

We have "food scientists" making the food that our kids are eating. And hint: these "scientists" work for the company who employs them, to try to save the company money in every single way possible, NOT for you or your children. Just think about that. Most of it isn't even food anymore.

Both the state of California and the World Health Organization publicly recognize that Roundup causes cancer and yet we're still allowing it to be sprayed it in our schools and parks and neighborhood gardens.

Our kids are sitting in front of screens when they're at home and now they're sitting in front of screens at school too because it's apparently the way most schools have decided it's easier to control the kids (big surprise). Nobody cares that studies have shown that the more that kids are exposed to screens, the lower their attention spans get.

I could go on and on. There are a ton of issues. I'm happy to start anywhere. But just being in denial about everything is not helping anyone.

[Anonymous]

I think the elephant in the room is that schools went too far with the inclusion model and it's becoming obvious that some kids really, really cannot function well in Gen Ed, even with a lot of extra supports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the elephant in the room is that schools went too far with the inclusion model and it's becoming obvious that some kids really, really cannot function well in Gen Ed, even with a lot of extra supports.

Lawmakers went too far. The idea of least restrictive environment should have been qualified with an emphatic "... provided that there is no negative impact on the other students" or similar.

Schools only do what they do because they know the law isn't on their side and they're afraid of getting sued.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the elephant in the room is that schools went too far with the inclusion model and it's becoming obvious that some kids really, really cannot function well in Gen Ed, even with a lot of extra supports.

I think that schools have gone too far with the testing to prepare for the tests. They have spent their budgets on standardized tests and test prep coaches and data people instead of keeping the class sizes smaller and the curriculum developmentally appropriate. More teachers and more social emotional learning would help all children and would go a long way to preventing or minimizing the behavior issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These two posts do t name the “epidemic” to which hey refer... what is the epidemic?

Sounds like they mean mental illness...but they’re being very drama queeny about it.

I think they are antivaxxers. See the infertility reference.

Oh, yeah, you’re probably right.

I said the infertility reference because it's the one thing that people on this board seem to be able to comprehend. People are either pregnant or they're not. You can't be in denial about it and you can't pretend and you can't negotiate and you can't change the definition.

If you're asking whether I think all vaccines are a great idea for all kids in all cases, the answer is no. If you're asking whether some vaccines are a great idea in some cases, the answer is yes. But I (personally) was referring to much more than vaccines.

We have "food scientists" making the food that our kids are eating. And hint: these "scientists" work for the company who employs them, to try to save the company money in every single way possible, NOT for you or your children. Just think about that. Most of it isn't even food anymore.

Both the state of California and the World Health Organization publicly recognize that Roundup causes cancer and yet we're still allowing it to be sprayed it in our schools and parks and neighborhood gardens.

Our kids are sitting in front of screens when they're at home and now they're sitting in front of screens at school too because it's apparently the way most schools have decided it's easier to control the kids (big surprise). Nobody cares that studies have shown that the more that kids are exposed to screens, the lower their attention spans get.

I could go on and on. There are a ton of issues. I'm happy to start anywhere. But just being in denial about everything is not helping anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These two posts do t name the “epidemic” to which hey refer... what is the epidemic?

Sounds like they mean mental illness...but they’re being very drama queeny about it.

I think they are antivaxxers. See the infertility reference.

Oh, yeah, you’re probably right.

I said the infertility reference because it's the one thing that people on this board seem to be able to comprehend. People are either pregnant or they're not. You can't be in denial about it and you can't pretend and you can't negotiate and you can't change the definition.

If you're asking whether I think all vaccines are a great idea for all kids in all cases, the answer is no. If you're asking whether some vaccines are a great idea in some cases, the answer is yes. But I (personally) was referring to much more than vaccines.

We have "food scientists" making the food that our kids are eating. And hint: these "scientists" work for the company who employs them, to try to save the company money in every single way possible, NOT for you or your children. Just think about that. Most of it isn't even food anymore.

Both the state of California and the World Health Organization publicly recognize that Roundup causes cancer and yet we're still allowing it to be sprayed it in our schools and parks and neighborhood gardens.

Our kids are sitting in front of screens when they're at home and now they're sitting in front of screens at school too because it's apparently the way most schools have decided it's easier to control the kids (big surprise). Nobody cares that studies have shown that the more that kids are exposed to screens, the lower their attention spans get.

I could go on and on. There are a ton of issues. I'm happy to start anywhere. But just being in denial about everything is not helping anyone.

DP
Why the eyeroll? If you think none of the above matters, what is your rationale behind the growing number of SN kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These threads make me so angry and rage cry. I've had a crap day and feel like slapping some of these posters.

My kid has some of these issues. The classroom has been cleared because of him. Do you know what we had to do in order to get him an appropriate placement where he is thriving? I'll tell you:

Thousands upon thousands of dollars of therapy, not including the amount of lost work/salary for me. I don't work anymore because it's too hard to manage.

At least 6 meetings with school a year, daily phone calls, IEP meetings, IEP revisions, FBAs/BIPs, etc. private testing. Daily phone call complaints from incompetent teachers, psychologists who told me "you don't seem to care about your kid (she got fired)," and a whole host of garbage comments from other parents.

Advocate and lawyer to help us through the process.
I had to have therapists who were baiting my child removed from the process after they admitted to baiting him to acting out.

More advocate and lawyer costs to get him into his correct placement, where he's thriving and doing very well.

And he's only in second grade. That's right, all of this and he's 7. This is a lifelong process for us. We'll do it again next year, and the year after, and the year after.

You know what I have to be able to do this: Time and Money. A lot of people don't have time and money to do these things. People can't quit their jobs to go to therapy. People can't pay lawyers and advocates to help them. We can and we're fortunate. I go to Special Ed group meetings near me and people are begging for help--they can't afford it, can't take time off, have trauma in their lives, etc.

Yes, some people ignore the problems until it's too late, or don't want their kid labeled, but I really believe that most people are doing the best they can, and, in some cases, they're relying on the school to help them through the process. You can't rely on them. You need need outside help and assistance and a lot of people can't afford that.

I don't want your kid to get his hand slammed in the door, or to have to evacuate the classroom. IT's not fair to any of the kids. But I also hate that this topic comes up once a week on this site and people don't seem to understand the other side of it. The lack of empathy for people on these threads is disgusting.

So I have an idea for you: Go use your voice to vote for candidates that support all aspects of public education, voice your concerns to your school board and principals, work for additional funding for schools, stop bitching about property taxes on your million dollar homes and then complain that we don't have enough aides for the SN kids. Stop thinking that parents aren't doing the best they can. Find some empathy for people who don't fit in the molds. Life is hard enough.

I have empathy and I feel very badly for you, I really do, but my child has started seeing tutors to help with reading and math because she's basically not being taught these subjects due to being in a class with not one, but two disruptive students and only one teacher and one aide. On top of that, all the attention spent on those kids means that other children are acting up more than normal and my child has a classmate constantly picking on and bothering her, and it has seriously impacted her ability to learn, her level of anxiety, and her love of school. We're also considering sending her to a psychologist to help with the anxiety issues. And yes, I've complained and documented and complained some more but apparently there's nothing the school can do for my child who was doing GREAT for two years before being put in this class with children the teachers can't handle. I really don't think this is fair to my child either, and has potentially long-term impacts on my child's mental health and well-being. You are not the ONLY one suffering.

This has nothing to do with one child. Your child is having tutors as they are struggling and probably also need assessed. Your child having anxiety probably is genetic or also something else going on. If its that bad ,send her to private. You don't get that these parents are doing the best they can and many are not equip to handle these indues and honestly, it doesn't sound like you can if you have to get tutors for a young child vs. working with them AND you are ignoring your child mental health.

Two sides to this and both have legitimate points of view. My child was in a class that was evacuated every few weeks in two different grades. I never even heard about it from her but a few parents mentioned it to me and I saw it happen once while volunteering. Not one of the kids seemed visibly upset. The evacuation was really quick and they just went to another classroom to continue the lesson. This was early elementary so it gave the kids a movement break and they continued with their lesson and were moved back into their classroom in about 5 minutes after another adult was able to come down and help the child who was upset.

DD has a friend with anxiety, and, her parents discovered a few years later, a learning disability. This situation was very difficult for her and the parents initially were in denial and blamed their DD's not being able to learn on the upset child. They did move her to a different classroom but found she was still struggling academically. This was about HER issue, not the other child's issue.

Public school is chaotic my friend and your child will encounter behavioral issues throughout K-12 so if this is making your child struggle you do have a right to bring it up with the administration but just know most students do fine with these disruptions.

Oh, ok, you're absolutely right, MY CHILD is the one who has problems, not PP's. I have the feeling that next year, when DD is in a class full of peers and not constantly evacuated from class and doesn't have shit thrown at her multiple times a week, she'll be doing a lot better. Have YOU ever had a desk thrown at you when you were at work? Multiple times? Threatened with scissors and sharp pencils??? You'd probably be anxious in that case, too. You and PP are real peaches.

I went to public schools in Maryland in 3 counties in the 60's and 70's. PUBLIC SCHOOL WAN NOT CHAOTIC THEN. I feel truly fortunate that I attended public schools
in a non chaotic environment. We had recess twice a day and kids looked forward to it. No kid ever roamed around in class. At no time was a teacher or student ever
threatened. I do remember a couple of fights in the hallway in highschool but the classrooms were a safe respite. No kids had extra time for tests. No kids had special one on
one coming in and out of the classroom. The teacher would have to tell the boys to settle down here and there but it was all very normal. Public school was not chaotic.
No chairs were thrown. I think it highly unlikely that any of my classmates were medicated. Kids were expected to behave in class. If you did not behave you were sent
to the principal's office. If there was a serious infraction like selling drugs you were suspended. I'm not sure when this chaos in public school became normative?
How can the other 99% of children be expected to learn with such chaos in their surroundings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These two posts do t name the “epidemic” to which hey refer... what is the epidemic?

Sounds like they mean mental illness...but they’re being very drama queeny about it.

I think they are antivaxxers. See the infertility reference.

Oh, yeah, you’re probably right.

I said the infertility reference because it's the one thing that people on this board seem to be able to comprehend. People are either pregnant or they're not. You can't be in denial about it and you can't pretend and you can't negotiate and you can't change the definition.

If you're asking whether I think all vaccines are a great idea for all kids in all cases, the answer is no. If you're asking whether some vaccines are a great idea in some cases, the answer is yes. But I (personally) was referring to much more than vaccines.

We have "food scientists" making the food that our kids are eating. And hint: these "scientists" work for the company who employs them, to try to save the company money in every single way possible, NOT for you or your children. Just think about that. Most of it isn't even food anymore.

Both the state of California and the World Health Organization publicly recognize that Roundup causes cancer and yet we're still allowing it to be sprayed it in our schools and parks and neighborhood gardens.

Our kids are sitting in front of screens when they're at home and now they're sitting in front of screens at school too because it's apparently the way most schools have decided it's easier to control the kids (big surprise). Nobody cares that studies have shown that the more that kids are exposed to screens, the lower their attention spans get.

I could go on and on. There are a ton of issues. I'm happy to start anywhere. But just being in denial about everything is not helping anyone.[/quot


I originally posted about the elephant in the room. I agree with everything above. SOMETHING is causing an epidemic of mental and physical illness (I can't name one friend with a child without either a behavioral issue, adhd, autism, asthma, learning disability, depression, anxiety, etc.) I don't believe there is one cause, but until the fact that there is something making people very very sick is at least acknowledged, we will keep spinning ourselves in circles.

I especially agree with the fact that most of what kids eat is not actually food in the nutritional sense, and that the chemicals that have been found to cause cancer in a court of law are in everything we eat and drink. Maybe we can start there.

[Anonymous]

I forgot to mention in the 60's and 70's the only time a class was evacuated was for a fire drill. I don't even understand how these evacuations for chair throwing are even legal particularly if the state mandates a child should be in school and in class so many days per year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that we as a society need to finally recognize that it's a zero sum game. We can't just sing lalala and pretend to be one big happy family. The fact is that inclusion is often detrimental to the other kids, especially when we're talking about behavioral issues. Therefore, in trying to "help" some kids by IGNORING the effect of their disruptions and continuing to offer them the "normal" educational system, we are literally HURTING the other kids. If we can admit that to ourselves and each other, then we can start asking the questions of HOW MUCH of a detriment is reasonable, if any at all.

Majority of kids with SN are not violent or disruptive or at least no more than your kids. There are a handful and those kids deserve more supports and better school situations but its near impossible for many families to access and those schools are not affordable for most. Instead of blaming the kid and families, look at the school system. Look at how much most of the major school systems like MCPS spend fighting families with attorney fees alone when that money could be spent on the kids. These kids don't want to act this way and need help. As a society we are failing these kids and we owe it to them and our society as they are are our future to do better for them.

"Behavioral issues" by definition means disruption, if not violence. If your child is SN in a way that really has no bearing on the rest of the class (e.g. speech issues or a dyslexia pullout once a week) then this is not relevant to you.

Nobody is arguing that these kids don't need more support than they're getting. What we're saying is that the level of support is not possible in the public school system without negatively affecting the other students. Clearing a room might be perfectly appropriate in a special school for kids with behavioral issues, but it is NOT appropriate in a public school setting unless in the case of a bomb threat or similar. A mainstreamed child should not be the equivalent of a bomb threat on the safety and wellbeing of other children.

Well put.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the elephant in the room is that schools went too far with the inclusion model and it's becoming obvious that some kids really, really cannot function well in Gen Ed, even with a lot of extra supports.

Lawmakers went too far. The idea of least restrictive environment should have been qualified with an emphatic "... provided that there is no negative impact on the other students" or similar.

Schools only do what they do because they know the law isn't on their side and they're afraid of getting sued.

This is the issue. There used to be more self-contained classrooms with 8-12 special ed kids a teacher and aide. Sine kids just can't cope with a gen. ed. Classroom. Then add to that that kids are no longer restrained or picked up and carried outside a classroom. They are allowed to destroy a classroom while 24 other kids have to leave. Why are we allowing one kid to have that much power. It is scary for all the other kids, the teacher, AND the kid destroying the class. Once a kid realizes there us NO consequence for destroying a classroom, running out of class, hitting teachers and other students, the kid does whatever they want at school. The kid realizes there is nothing the school can do to punish him. Now add to that many schools won't suspend kids like this, it becomes a hopeless situation. Other kids start witnessing this and one or two start misbehaving too. Suspensions are great to force parents to control their kid. it gives everyone a needed break and other kids realize there is a consequence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These two posts do t name the “epidemic” to which hey refer... what is the epidemic?

Sounds like they mean mental illness...but they’re being very drama queeny about it.

I think they are antivaxxers. See the infertility reference.

Oh, yeah, you’re probably right.

I said the infertility reference because it's the one thing that people on this board seem to be able to comprehend. People are either pregnant or they're not. You can't be in denial about it and you can't pretend and you can't negotiate and you can't change the definition.

If you're asking whether I think all vaccines are a great idea for all kids in all cases, the answer is no. If you're asking whether some vaccines are a great idea in some cases, the answer is yes. But I (personally) was referring to much more than vaccines.

We have "food scientists" making the food that our kids are eating. And hint: these "scientists" work for the company who employs them, to try to save the company money in every single way possible, NOT for you or your children. Just think about that. Most of it isn't even food anymore.

Both the state of California and the World Health Organization publicly recognize that Roundup causes cancer and yet we're still allowing it to be sprayed it in our schools and parks and neighborhood gardens.

Our kids are sitting in front of screens when they're at home and now they're sitting in front of screens at school too because it's apparently the way most schools have decided it's easier to control the kids (big surprise). Nobody cares that studies have shown that the more that kids are exposed to screens, the lower their attention spans get.

I could go on and on. There are a ton of issues. I'm happy to start anywhere. But just being in denial about everything is not helping anyone.

So you are an antivaxxer. Got it.