St. Ann’s (NYC) - Private School Horror Show

[Anonymous]

The title of this thread " St. Ann's (NYC)-Private School Horror Show" is inappropriate and unfounded as well as unfair to the school. I wish that the moderator would consider deleting the words "Horror Show" and substitute the word "Tragedy" or "Concern".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

That is never going to work for high school services in public, unless there was a recent updated neuropsych, which seems unlikely (the reporter would have mentioned it).

Why would it be unlikely and why would the reporter necessarily have mentioned it? I get my child's neuropsych updated every 3 years, although I am not required to by his public school district. It's useful in case any new accommodations may be appropriate. And I am doing this as a person who does not have $50K to spend on private school. It seems likely to me that the parents would in fact have done this periodically.

Because if the school didn’t ask for it, why would they have done it when they believed his academic needs were being met — as per literally all the evaluations received by the school itself? If you are told by the school evaluations and by the enrollment contracts that keep being offered that your child is doing okay, why would you have an assessment? It does not make sense to do it and certainly the article doesn’t mention anything other than the one early elementary assessment.

I do not think this child has been assessed since early elementary. Also, the fact remains that the school booted a child with SNs in February, so too late for any other privates and most NYC publics. That is appalling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We do know that the school sent the decline to enroll in February, which is too late to transfer elsewhere

I am in full agreement that they should have let the family know of the decline earlier, so that they could apply to privates specializing in kids with disabilities, if private is what they wanted. However, it is not accurate to say it was "too late to transfer elsewhere." Public school, which the vast majority of children in the US attend, and is legally required to provide accommodations, is always an option.

Oh come on. In order to get accommodations in public school districts, you need an IEP. And those take months and months, and usually by February are done for services for the following year. The PP was correctly summarizing the situation.

100% nonsense. You clearly have no understanding of the law. Schools can't just say "Welp, we're done providing services this year." That's not at all how it works.

You are wildly ignorant of reality. I’m not even sure where to start with this. It’s like you are reading some sort of school propaganda and ignorant of how the actual system works.

My child has an IEP in a public school. Where in the world did you get the idea that there's a cutoff in the school year to get evaluated for an IEP? You can start the process at any time. The district needs to respond within 45 days by law. You cannot be denied an evaluation regardless of the time of year.

I have multiple kids with IEPs in public and private, now in high school and college. I have been through the wringer as far as advocating for services. You are talking about the idealistic theory under the law, I am talking about the real world. Yes, of course you can start the process any time. And yes, of course the school has to respond in 45 days. That theory is all correct.

But the reality is that it is much harder to get services if there is no IEP in place for a new student coming in, especially if there is no recent neuropsych report. Also, school districts by February have assessed their staffing needs for the following year. That means that totally new students, sure, yes they can request. Anyone can request anything. But it is harder, in many districts, to get a full evaluation with services towards the end of the school year. The “reserve” districts have for staffing will be prioritized to those more extreme students, which there is no indication this child was.

The fact remains that if this child was only formally told that he would not be re-enrolled in February after years of waffling, the school acted unconscionably.

The private had them do a neuropsych per the article. It didn't say if it had been updated but the school in ES started telling these parents it wasn't a good fit and child should be moved to a school that would better meet his needs. They were probably worried about getting sued or parents going to the media. To expect a private to help for that level of dyslexia and ADD is not reasonable.

The private had them do a neuropsych in early elementary. That is never going to work for high school services in public, unless there was a recent updated neuropsych, which seems unlikely (the reporter would have mentioned it). So this is a kid with no recent neuropsych, told in February that he couldn’t come back the next year, thus ensuring the child missed all other private school deadlines including for SN schools. It is unconscionable.

The school per the article tried to get the parents to change schools multiple occasions and the parents refused and insisted this child continue.

The parents were looking out for the best interests of the child. A child who had no behavioral problems, was not failing and was not hurting anybody. In theory, the school should have been looking out for the child’s best interests also. Are we really paying $50K so children can serve wealthy, well-endowed schools and their administrators?

How were they looking out for the best interest of the child by keeping him in a school that couldn’t meet his needs?

I mean the question is what are his needs and what is the goal? It sounds like this student may never win a writing contest or go into a field where that skill set is necessary. But many students without disabilities are mediocre writers whose strengths are in STEM or art or athletics. His family wasn’t asking the school to work magic, it was asking them to value his strengths and contributions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That is never going to work for high school services in public, unless there was a recent updated neuropsych, which seems unlikely (the reporter would have mentioned it).

Why would it be unlikely and why would the reporter necessarily have mentioned it? I get my child's neuropsych updated every 3 years, although I am not required to by his public school district. It's useful in case any new accommodations may be appropriate. And I am doing this as a person who does not have $50K to spend on private school. It seems likely to me that the parents would in fact have done this periodically.

Because if the school didn’t ask for it, why would they have done it when they believed his academic needs were being met — as per literally all the evaluations received by the school itself? If you are told by the school evaluations and by the enrollment contracts that keep being offered that your child is doing okay, why would you have an assessment? It does not make sense to do it and certainly the article doesn’t mention anything other than the one early elementary assessment.

I do not think this child has been assessed since early elementary. Also, the fact remains that the school booted a child with SNs in February, so too late for any other privates and most NYC publics. That is appalling.

Yeah and families that find themselves without stellar school options often grudgingly flee to the burbs but that was complicated by the fact that they had an upperclassman at the school doing well who most would agree should not be plucked at that moment and dumped in Montclair, NJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We do know that the school sent the decline to enroll in February, which is too late to transfer elsewhere

I am in full agreement that they should have let the family know of the decline earlier, so that they could apply to privates specializing in kids with disabilities, if private is what they wanted. However, it is not accurate to say it was "too late to transfer elsewhere." Public school, which the vast majority of children in the US attend, and is legally required to provide accommodations, is always an option.

Oh come on. In order to get accommodations in public school districts, you need an IEP. And those take months and months, and usually by February are done for services for the following year. The PP was correctly summarizing the situation.

100% nonsense. You clearly have no understanding of the law. Schools can't just say "Welp, we're done providing services this year." That's not at all how it works.

You are wildly ignorant of reality. I’m not even sure where to start with this. It’s like you are reading some sort of school propaganda and ignorant of how the actual system works.

My child has an IEP in a public school. Where in the world did you get the idea that there's a cutoff in the school year to get evaluated for an IEP? You can start the process at any time. The district needs to respond within 45 days by law. You cannot be denied an evaluation regardless of the time of year.

I have multiple kids with IEPs in public and private, now in high school and college. I have been through the wringer as far as advocating for services. You are talking about the idealistic theory under the law, I am talking about the real world. Yes, of course you can start the process any time. And yes, of course the school has to respond in 45 days. That theory is all correct.

But the reality is that it is much harder to get services if there is no IEP in place for a new student coming in, especially if there is no recent neuropsych report. Also, school districts by February have assessed their staffing needs for the following year. That means that totally new students, sure, yes they can request. Anyone can request anything. But it is harder, in many districts, to get a full evaluation with services towards the end of the school year. The “reserve” districts have for staffing will be prioritized to those more extreme students, which there is no indication this child was.

The fact remains that if this child was only formally told that he would not be re-enrolled in February after years of waffling, the school acted unconscionably.

The private had them do a neuropsych per the article. It didn't say if it had been updated but the school in ES started telling these parents it wasn't a good fit and child should be moved to a school that would better meet his needs. They were probably worried about getting sued or parents going to the media. To expect a private to help for that level of dyslexia and ADD is not reasonable.

The private had them do a neuropsych in early elementary. That is never going to work for high school services in public, unless there was a recent updated neuropsych, which seems unlikely (the reporter would have mentioned it). So this is a kid with no recent neuropsych, told in February that he couldn’t come back the next year, thus ensuring the child missed all other private school deadlines including for SN schools. It is unconscionable.

The school per the article tried to get the parents to change schools multiple occasions and the parents refused and insisted this child continue.

The parents were looking out for the best interests of the child. A child who had no behavioral problems, was not failing and was not hurting anybody. In theory, the school should have been looking out for the child’s best interests also. Are we really paying $50K so children can serve wealthy, well-endowed schools and their administrators?

How were they looking out for the best interest of the child by keeping him in a school that couldn’t meet his needs?

I mean the question is what are his needs and what is the goal? It sounds like this student may never win a writing contest or go into a field where that skill set is necessary. But many students without disabilities are mediocre writers whose strengths are in STEM or art or athletics. His family wasn’t asking the school to work magic, it was asking them to value his strengths and contributions.

Sounds like the parents just wanted to have the kid be kept at the school until he turns 18, no interest really on if he was learning anything.

[Anonymous]

How can you make that judgement. Let’s rephrase to parents understand that school is also social/emotional connection and their child was having a good experience. Why would you want to disrupt this when you are also comfortable that their child is learning.

[Anonymous]

I’m one of the PPs here who is appalled by the school, assuming — and that is a big assumption — that the timeline in the article is correct. And the reason is that I have a severely dyslexic child in a highly competitive private school who is flourishing, with supports. My kid showed signs of dyslexia in kinder in public, and for years we had an annual battle for services and to make sure his IEP was being properly served (often not). We finally gave up on public after one of his teachers mocked his handwriting in front of the class multiple times.

We disclosed everything to the private when applying, all IEPs and neuropsych reports. And they were in turn very clear about what they could do and could not do as far as supports and accommodations. Clarity is possible in these situations, I know it is.

I also know families with kids who were counseled out for various reasons. At the school my kid attends, they are told the summer before, and it is clearly messaged. Often the school offers placement help. They are given significant time to process and don’t miss any application deadlines.

I know all of this can be done, which is why I find the timeline as reported shocking. It is possible something is missing, but as reported, the timeline is appalling. I hope the lawsuit proceeds, if only to shine light on what actually happened.

[Anonymous]

Because if the school didn’t ask for it, why would they have done it when they believed his academic needs were being met — as per literally all the evaluations received by the school itself? If you are told by the school evaluations and by the enrollment contracts that keep being offered that your child is doing okay, why would you have an assessment?

I already answered this, you just don't agree, which is fine. Also, because based on my experience, it is recommended by the neuropsych. You don't just get one eval that is accurate and up to date for the remainder of a child's life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We do know that the school sent the decline to enroll in February, which is too late to transfer elsewhere

I am in full agreement that they should have let the family know of the decline earlier, so that they could apply to privates specializing in kids with disabilities, if private is what they wanted. However, it is not accurate to say it was "too late to transfer elsewhere." Public school, which the vast majority of children in the US attend, and is legally required to provide accommodations, is always an option.

Oh come on. In order to get accommodations in public school districts, you need an IEP. And those take months and months, and usually by February are done for services for the following year. The PP was correctly summarizing the situation.

100% nonsense. You clearly have no understanding of the law. Schools can't just say "Welp, we're done providing services this year." That's not at all how it works.

You are wildly ignorant of reality. I’m not even sure where to start with this. It’s like you are reading some sort of school propaganda and ignorant of how the actual system works.

My child has an IEP in a public school. Where in the world did you get the idea that there's a cutoff in the school year to get evaluated for an IEP? You can start the process at any time. The district needs to respond within 45 days by law. You cannot be denied an evaluation regardless of the time of year.

I have multiple kids with IEPs in public and private, now in high school and college. I have been through the wringer as far as advocating for services. You are talking about the idealistic theory under the law, I am talking about the real world. Yes, of course you can start the process any time. And yes, of course the school has to respond in 45 days. That theory is all correct.

But the reality is that it is much harder to get services if there is no IEP in place for a new student coming in, especially if there is no recent neuropsych report. Also, school districts by February have assessed their staffing needs for the following year. That means that totally new students, sure, yes they can request. Anyone can request anything. But it is harder, in many districts, to get a full evaluation with services towards the end of the school year. The “reserve” districts have for staffing will be prioritized to those more extreme students, which there is no indication this child was.

The fact remains that if this child was only formally told that he would not be re-enrolled in February after years of waffling, the school acted unconscionably.

The private had them do a neuropsych per the article. It didn't say if it had been updated but the school in ES started telling these parents it wasn't a good fit and child should be moved to a school that would better meet his needs. They were probably worried about getting sued or parents going to the media. To expect a private to help for that level of dyslexia and ADD is not reasonable.

The private had them do a neuropsych in early elementary. That is never going to work for high school services in public, unless there was a recent updated neuropsych, which seems unlikely (the reporter would have mentioned it). So this is a kid with no recent neuropsych, told in February that he couldn’t come back the next year, thus ensuring the child missed all other private school deadlines including for SN schools. It is unconscionable.

The school per the article tried to get the parents to change schools multiple occasions and the parents refused and insisted this child continue.

The parents were looking out for the best interests of the child. A child who had no behavioral problems, was not failing and was not hurting anybody. In theory, the school should have been looking out for the child’s best interests also. Are we really paying $50K so children can serve wealthy, well-endowed schools and their administrators?

How were they looking out for the best interest of the child by keeping him in a school that couldn’t meet his needs?

I mean the question is what are his needs and what is the goal? It sounds like this student may never win a writing contest or go into a field where that skill set is necessary. But many students without disabilities are mediocre writers whose strengths are in STEM or art or athletics. His family wasn’t asking the school to work magic, it was asking them to value his strengths and contributions.

Sounds like the parents just wanted to have the kid be kept at the school until he turns 18, no interest really on if he was learning anything.

When you say ridiculous and trollish things like this, you make it impossible to have a real discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Because if the school didn’t ask for it, why would they have done it when they believed his academic needs were being met — as per literally all the evaluations received by the school itself? If you are told by the school evaluations and by the enrollment contracts that keep being offered that your child is doing okay, why would you have an assessment?

I already answered this, you just don't agree, which is fine. Also, because based on my experience, it is recommended by the neuropsych. You don't just get one eval that is accurate and up to date for the remainder of a child's life.

And your experience should be everyone’s? Got it.

[Anonymous]

I personally would not keep my child at a school that told me it cannot meet his needs.

[Anonymous]

His family wasn’t asking the school to work magic, it was asking them to value his strengths and contributions.

Yes, and morally, I think the school should have done that. But that's a different question as to whether there is a basis for a lawsuit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I personally would not keep my child at a school that told me it cannot meet his needs.

It’s not at all clear the school said anything so direct to the family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I personally would not keep my child at a school that told me it cannot meet his needs.

I mean, obviously if it were that clear as far as messaging, nobody would. But it sounds like they were super wishy washy saying he was making progress and whatnot.

Let’s also put this timeline in perspective. When his parents were notified on Feb. 3, 2021, it was before covid vaccines were widely available for non elderly and non first responders. My own kids had not been permitted to set foot in any classroom yet that school year (in the DMV). I have no idea what in person or virtual options were available at St. Ann’s and I also don’t know if any NYC privates were doing in person tours. Some neuropsychologists were doing in person evaluations but others were not or were offering virtual only for that age group. The NYC public schools were a literal disaster, technically open, but flipping to virtual daily based on rainbow zones based on neighborhoods and zip codes. Lots of New Yorkers had fled for the year. It’s easy to forget that this notification came amidst all of this. It’s not exactly easy to snap your fingers and move a kid this age.

[Anonymous]

The article said when the kid was in 3rd grade the school explicitly said they couldn’t meet his needs… it was at that point that my child was not going back to that school.