Teacher shot at Newport News elementary school

[Anonymous]

The parents are clearly idiots. That has to contribute to this kid’s condition.

[Anonymous]

If they were willing to attend school with their kid. Appsrently all year? Which they are not legally required to do...i want to give them the benefit of the doubt, but owning a gun was so colosally stupid, i just cannot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does "acute disability" mean? How unusual is it for a parent to attend classes with the child as part of an IEP?

It probably means no one knows what the child’s disability is yet. I have a 6 year old who has been diagnosed with probably 8 different things by a variety of specialists over time. It’s very hard to tell what kids have when they are so young. It will become clear when he gets older what he has, but they know now that it’s severe and disrupts his ability to think and function in a classroom.

The special education eligibility area of Significant Developmental Delay is often applicable for children who need support, but the diagnosis isn't clear yet. I do wonder if this child had an appropriate IEP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they were willing to attend school with their kid. Appsrently all year? Which they are not legally required to do...i want to give them the benefit of the doubt, but owning a gun was so colosally stupid, i just cannot.

Having an accessible gun in their home was a very poor parenting decision. It was likely one of many poor decisions, which certainly contributed to the condition of that child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they were willing to attend school with their kid. Appsrently all year? Which they are not legally required to do...i want to give them the benefit of the doubt, but owning a gun was so colosally stupid, i just cannot.

benefit of the doubt? then why weren't they there that day?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they were willing to attend school with their kid. Appsrently all year? Which they are not legally required to do...i want to give them the benefit of the doubt, but owning a gun was so colosally stupid, i just cannot.

benefit of the doubt? then why weren't they there that day?

The gun belonged to them, and their kid got ahold of it and shot someone. End of story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does "acute disability" mean? How unusual is it for a parent to attend classes with the child as part of an IEP?

It probably means no one knows what the child’s disability is yet. I have a 6 year old who has been diagnosed with probably 8 different things by a variety of specialists over time. It’s very hard to tell what kids have when they are so young. It will become clear when he gets older what he has, but they know now that it’s severe and disrupts his ability to think and function in a classroom.

The special education eligibility area of Significant Developmental Delay is often applicable for children who need support, but the diagnosis isn't clear yet. I do wonder if this child had an appropriate IEP.

No there is no way he did because the entire situation violates a real IEP in a million ways. The parents had a DEAL with admin to try to work it out for some reason.

[Anonymous]

Parents need to be charged

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does "acute disability" mean? How unusual is it for a parent to attend classes with the child as part of an IEP?

It probably means no one knows what the child’s disability is yet. I have a 6 year old who has been diagnosed with probably 8 different things by a variety of specialists over time. It’s very hard to tell what kids have when they are so young. It will become clear when he gets older what he has, but they know now that it’s severe and disrupts his ability to think and function in a classroom.

The special education eligibility area of Significant Developmental Delay is often applicable for children who need support, but the diagnosis isn't clear yet. I do wonder if this child had an appropriate IEP.

No there is no way he did because the entire situation violates a real IEP in a million ways. The parents had a DEAL with admin to try to work it out for some reason.

+1. There are parents who refuse services for their children or refuse alternate placements. Sometimes they volunteer to come pick their kids up when they go into crisis, thereby avoiding suspensions or discipline referrals. The school doesn’t want to suspend too many kids with disabilities and the parents don’t want their kid to have 35 disciplinary referrals by the end of 1st grade. It’s largely impractical and sets the kid up for all kinds of problems later on, but allowing this kind of thing, or agreeing to let a parent be the 1:1 for their out of control kid, is a lot less work and expense for schools in the short term in many cases. Plus, it makes the admin look better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does "acute disability" mean? How unusual is it for a parent to attend classes with the child as part of an IEP?

It probably means no one knows what the child’s disability is yet. I have a 6 year old who has been diagnosed with probably 8 different things by a variety of specialists over time. It’s very hard to tell what kids have when they are so young. It will become clear when he gets older what he has, but they know now that it’s severe and disrupts his ability to think and function in a classroom.

The special education eligibility area of Significant Developmental Delay is often applicable for children who need support, but the diagnosis isn't clear yet. I do wonder if this child had an appropriate IEP.

No there is no way he did because the entire situation violates a real IEP in a million ways. The parents had a DEAL with admin to try to work it out for some reason.

+1. There are parents who refuse services for their children or refuse alternate placements. Sometimes they volunteer to come pick their kids up when they go into crisis, thereby avoiding suspensions or discipline referrals. The school doesn’t want to suspend too many kids with disabilities and the parents don’t want their kid to have 35 disciplinary referrals by the end of 1st grade. It’s largely impractical and sets the kid up for all kinds of problems later on, but allowing this kind of thing, or agreeing to let a parent be the 1:1 for their out of control kid, is a lot less work and expense for schools in the short term in many cases. Plus, it makes the admin look better.

My suspicion is it’s one of two scenarios:

1. Student is Black and Assistant principal was trying to avoid any perception of criminalizing a Black student or facing accusations of racial animus and targeting.

2. Student is white but AP is Black and was scared parents would sue if she didn’t work with them to keep their child unidentified for sped.

Quite truly nothing else explains the AP’s choices to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does "acute disability" mean? How unusual is it for a parent to attend classes with the child as part of an IEP?

It probably means no one knows what the child’s disability is yet. I have a 6 year old who has been diagnosed with probably 8 different things by a variety of specialists over time. It’s very hard to tell what kids have when they are so young. It will become clear when he gets older what he has, but they know now that it’s severe and disrupts his ability to think and function in a classroom.

The special education eligibility area of Significant Developmental Delay is often applicable for children who need support, but the diagnosis isn't clear yet. I do wonder if this child had an appropriate IEP.

No there is no way he did because the entire situation violates a real IEP in a million ways. The parents had a DEAL with admin to try to work it out for some reason.

+1. There are parents who refuse services for their children or refuse alternate placements. Sometimes they volunteer to come pick their kids up when they go into crisis, thereby avoiding suspensions or discipline referrals. The school doesn’t want to suspend too many kids with disabilities and the parents don’t want their kid to have 35 disciplinary referrals by the end of 1st grade. It’s largely impractical and sets the kid up for all kinds of problems later on, but allowing this kind of thing, or agreeing to let a parent be the 1:1 for their out of control kid, is a lot less work and expense for schools in the short term in many cases. Plus, it makes the admin look better.

My suspicion is it’s one of two scenarios:

1. Student is Black and Assistant principal was trying to avoid any perception of criminalizing a Black student or facing accusations of racial animus and targeting.

2. Student is white but AP is Black and was scared parents would sue if she didn’t work with them to keep their child unidentified for sped.

Quite truly nothing else explains the AP’s choices to me.

Kid is not white. If so, this info would have "slipped out" on day one.

[Anonymous]

Has there been any update on the teacher and how she is doing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does "acute disability" mean? How unusual is it for a parent to attend classes with the child as part of an IEP?

It probably means no one knows what the child’s disability is yet. I have a 6 year old who has been diagnosed with probably 8 different things by a variety of specialists over time. It’s very hard to tell what kids have when they are so young. It will become clear when he gets older what he has, but they know now that it’s severe and disrupts his ability to think and function in a classroom.

The special education eligibility area of Significant Developmental Delay is often applicable for children who need support, but the diagnosis isn't clear yet. I do wonder if this child had an appropriate IEP.

No there is no way he did because the entire situation violates a real IEP in a million ways. The parents had a DEAL with admin to try to work it out for some reason.

PP here. I've thought the same, but there seems to be a lot of misinformation in the news due to (understandably) lack of info. Certainly, the AP who resigned from the district wouldn't have done that unless some of the info about what happened were accurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has there been any update on the teacher and how she is doing?

She was released but the bullet is still lodged inside her.

[Anonymous]

Was it a “deal” or is this a legitimate way how schools are dealing with “troubled” kids (whatever the reason)?

Some parents with kids who were in the same classroom are obviously upset and terrified, but I haven’t heard anyone mention how utterly disruptive and inappropriate it is to have parents of one child in your child’s classroom every single day all day. I can’t even believe this is allowed.
100% this child needed to be out of the general classroom, and quickly.