Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Floor-time and services aimed towards autism spectrum students may be a compelling need, but
how many such students are there really at CMI, 10-15 percent?
Impossible to know. 28% of students have IEPs but all we know is the bands of service hours they qualify for (e.g. 67% of all the CMI students with IEPs are level 1, so less than 10 hours per week).
And there are no independent, peer reviewed studies showing floortime is necessarily more effective than other interventions.
If CMI wants to tout its commitment to students with SN, they should follow Bridges and go through the process to create a SN preference for the lottery.
Are you sure? I thought this was their whole schtick.
Yes that is the intervention that CMI has built their program around. However, to date, there are NO independent studies of the Floortime program (e.g. peer-reviewed, published literature) and health insurance won't reimburse for it. Floortime with give you anecdotal data that they've compiled into reports, and many parents swear by it.
That’s because it’s similar to a cult. But it only works for one type of kid. If you are at CMI and your child has other needs, well - best of luck.
There’s more to it than that, but it isn’t an academic intervention. It is designed to help improve
social engagement and joint attention — critical skills for children with autism. But if, for example, your child has dyslexia, dyscalculia, a speech disorder unrelated to autism, it won’t help one bit.
And that is why some CMI parents swear by it for their SN kids and others are bitterly disappointed.