Hypothetical question

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd press the button. OK, so what?

Real question:

Does it actually make sense to direct so much funding to kids who realistically will never be able to find meaningful work at the expense of kids who could become brilliant if the right resources were provided?

So much money is spent on sped. And in some circumstances, it’s just respite care for the parents, not anything meaningful academically (or otherwise).

And if inclusion means everyone needs an (expensive) 1:1 aide, WTF are we actually doing?!

I would push the button, but I have absolutely no problem with my tax dollars being used as respite care for parents of the severely disabled. Absolutely those families deserve society's support. WTF wouldn't they? What happened to being in a society where we care for the least of these?

I’m not saying we shouldn’t fund their needs, just that we should reevaluate what their NEEDS truly are. Their care shouldn’t come at the expense of everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd press the button. OK, so what?

Real question:

Does it actually make sense to direct so much funding to kids who realistically will never be able to find meaningful work at the expense of kids who could become brilliant if the right resources were provided?

So much money is spent on sped. And in some circumstances, it’s just respite care for the parents, not anything meaningful academically (or otherwise).

And if inclusion means everyone needs an (expensive) 1:1 aide, WTF are we actually doing?!

I would push the button, but I have absolutely no problem with my tax dollars being used as respite care for parents of the severely disabled. Absolutely those families deserve society's support. WTF wouldn't they? What happened to being in a society where we care for the least of these?

I’m not saying we shouldn’t fund their needs, just that we should reevaluate what their NEEDS truly are. Their care shouldn’t come at the expense of everyone else.

This is so ignorant. Most kids getting sped services aren’t severely disabled. Many just have learning disabilities. And for many kids in sped, resources they get in public school can make the difference between learning to read or never learning; between ever holding a job vs not, etc. Prisons are filled with dyslexic people who never got what they needed.

I have kids who are “gifted” (& one who is 2E), but the margin of difference a decent education can made for sped kids is likely much larger than the difference for gifted kids.

That said, I think gifted kids also deserve an appropriate education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd press the button. OK, so what?

Real question:

Does it actually make sense to direct so much funding to kids who realistically will never be able to find meaningful work at the expense of kids who could become brilliant if the right resources were provided?

So much money is spent on sped. And in some circumstances, it’s just respite care for the parents, not anything meaningful academically (or otherwise).

And if inclusion means everyone needs an (expensive) 1:1 aide, WTF are we actually doing?!

I would push the button, but I have absolutely no problem with my tax dollars being used as respite care for parents of the severely disabled. Absolutely those families deserve society's support. WTF wouldn't they? What happened to being in a society where we care for the least of these?

I’m not saying we shouldn’t fund their needs, just that we should reevaluate what their NEEDS truly are. Their care shouldn’t come at the expense of everyone else.

This is so ignorant. Most kids getting sped services aren’t severely disabled. Many just have learning disabilities. And for many kids in sped, resources they get in public school can make the difference between learning to read or never learning; between ever holding a job vs not, etc. Prisons are filled with dyslexic people who never got what they needed.

I have kids who are “gifted” (& one who is 2E), but the margin of difference a decent education can made for sped kids is likely much larger than the difference for gifted kids.

That said, I think gifted kids also deserve an appropriate education.

Dyslexic kids don’t need 1:1 aides. I’m not talking about them.

We need to go back to grouping kids by ability. That will streamline resources (and help get teachers to stop leaving in droves. Who wants to teach a gen ed class with 10 ieps?!?! NO ONE)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd press the button. OK, so what?

Real question:

Does it actually make sense to direct so much funding to kids who realistically will never be able to find meaningful work at the expense of kids who could become brilliant if the right resources were provided?

So much money is spent on sped. And in some circumstances, it’s just respite care for the parents, not anything meaningful academically (or otherwise).

And if inclusion means everyone needs an (expensive) 1:1 aide, WTF are we actually doing?!

I would push the button, but I have absolutely no problem with my tax dollars being used as respite care for parents of the severely disabled. Absolutely those families deserve society's support. WTF wouldn't they? What happened to being in a society where we care for the least of these?

I’m not saying we shouldn’t fund their needs, just that we should reevaluate what their NEEDS truly are. Their care shouldn’t come at the expense of everyone else.

This is so ignorant. Most kids getting sped services aren’t severely disabled. Many just have learning disabilities. And for many kids in sped, resources they get in public school can make the difference between learning to read or never learning; between ever holding a job vs not, etc. Prisons are filled with dyslexic people who never got what they needed.

I have kids who are “gifted” (& one who is 2E), but the margin of difference a decent education can made for sped kids is likely much larger than the difference for gifted kids.

That said, I think gifted kids also deserve an appropriate education.

This is the reason sped kids below a certain threshold should not be in the gen ed classroom at all. They would receive much better assistance from a program where every staff member would be certified sped and costs could be mitigated as services would be centralized. Middle of the pack kids receive a disservice when resources and teachers are disproportionately stripped away by kids who need one-to-one attention all the time. It's very selfish of sped parents to think their kids deserve it all and other kids should suck it up when the educational outcome of a sped only program would be superior for all learner groups over a blended classroom. The amount of money from the general funding allotted to each student should be close to similar, and any additional services should be earmarked as a separate line item.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd press the button. OK, so what?

Real question:

Does it actually make sense to direct so much funding to kids who realistically will never be able to find meaningful work at the expense of kids who could become brilliant if the right resources were provided?

So much money is spent on sped. And in some circumstances, it’s just respite care for the parents, not anything meaningful academically (or otherwise).

And if inclusion means everyone needs an (expensive) 1:1 aide, WTF are we actually doing?!

I would push the button, but I have absolutely no problem with my tax dollars being used as respite care for parents of the severely disabled. Absolutely those families deserve society's support. WTF wouldn't they? What happened to being in a society where we care for the least of these?

I’m not saying we shouldn’t fund their needs, just that we should reevaluate what their NEEDS truly are. Their care shouldn’t come at the expense of everyone else.

This is so ignorant. Most kids getting sped services aren’t severely disabled. Many just have learning disabilities. And for many kids in sped, resources they get in public school can make the difference between learning to read or never learning; between ever holding a job vs not, etc. Prisons are filled with dyslexic people who never got what they needed.

I have kids who are “gifted” (& one who is 2E), but the margin of difference a decent education can made for sped kids is likely much larger than the difference for gifted kids.

That said, I think gifted kids also deserve an appropriate education.

Dyslexic kids don’t need 1:1 aides. I’m not talking about them.

We need to go back to grouping kids by ability. That will streamline resources (and help get teachers to stop leaving in droves. Who wants to teach a gen ed class with 10 ieps?!?! NO ONE)

GeT a Co-TeAcHeR for every gen-ed class so all the sped kids can feel better. And hemorrhage money while you’re at it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd press the button. OK, so what?

Real question:

Does it actually make sense to direct so much funding to kids who realistically will never be able to find meaningful work at the expense of kids who could become brilliant if the right resources were provided?

So much money is spent on sped. And in some circumstances, it’s just respite care for the parents, not anything meaningful academically (or otherwise).

And if inclusion means everyone needs an (expensive) 1:1 aide, WTF are we actually doing?!

I would push the button, but I have absolutely no problem with my tax dollars being used as respite care for parents of the severely disabled. Absolutely those families deserve society's support. WTF wouldn't they? What happened to being in a society where we care for the least of these?

I’m not saying we shouldn’t fund their needs, just that we should reevaluate what their NEEDS truly are. Their care shouldn’t come at the expense of everyone else.

This is so ignorant. Most kids getting sped services aren’t severely disabled. Many just have learning disabilities. And for many kids in sped, resources they get in public school can make the difference between learning to read or never learning; between ever holding a job vs not, etc. Prisons are filled with dyslexic people who never got what they needed.

I have kids who are “gifted” (& one who is 2E), but the margin of difference a decent education can made for sped kids is likely much larger than the difference for gifted kids.

That said, I think gifted kids also deserve an appropriate education.

Dyslexic kids don’t need 1:1 aides. I’m not talking about them.

We need to go back to grouping kids by ability. That will streamline resources (and help get teachers to stop leaving in droves. Who wants to teach a gen ed class with 10 ieps?!?! NO ONE)

GeT a Co-TeAcHeR for every gen-ed class so all the sped kids can feel better. And hemorrhage money while you’re at it.

Ok, so you’re kinda mean, but I guess I agree that the advanced kids shouldn’t have to wait for all the others to catch up before learning something new.

[Anonymous]

Wow. Some of these comments are awful. I can tell you that, a few decades ago, yes— they put all the sped kids in their own class. This included kids with profound disabilities who could not speak or use the toilet even as teenagers, and it included kids with dyslexia.

My sibling & my spouse were in classes like this (both dyslexic). Trust me, it did NOT lead to “better educational outcomes” for the kids who just had an LD. Instead, kids in those classes were stigmatized by peers, and the adults at the school assumed they weren’t capable of much & certainly wouldn’t go to college. It was an awful system.

Now, I agree that kids with extreme needs/profound cognitive or developmental disabilities might do better with their own class/nor mainstreamed. But that’s already happening.

[Anonymous]

Proposal

Eliminate 89% of Syphax
Eliminate all the tech — 1:1, support etc

Add a gifted 2nd teacher for the classrooms that need it, like the classes now with an IEP/sped helper and allow differentiation by kid/subject on an as needed basis (same as kids with LDs).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow. Some of these comments are awful. I can tell you that, a few decades ago, yes— they put all the sped kids in their own class. This included kids with profound disabilities who could not speak or use the toilet even as teenagers, and it included kids with dyslexia.

My sibling & my spouse were in classes like this (both dyslexic). Trust me, it did NOT lead to “better educational outcomes” for the kids who just had an LD. Instead, kids in those classes were stigmatized by peers, and the adults at the school assumed they weren’t capable of much & certainly wouldn’t go to college. It was an awful system.

Now, I agree that kids with extreme needs/profound cognitive or developmental disabilities might do better with their own class/nor mainstreamed. But that’s already happening.

I don’t agree that students with dyslexia should be placed into self-contained sped classes (unless they have additional diagnoses that require it), but there has to be a middle ground. Additional tiers should be in place. Those who are ready to tackle more challenging work can be placed into one classroom, while those with greater needs are placed into another classroom with fewer students and more supports.

What we have got to stop doing is pretending that mixing all ability levels together is doing anyone favors. It’s one of the biggest reasons teachers are leaving — having a gen ed class of 30 students, half of them with ieps. It’s an absurd amount of work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow. Some of these comments are awful. I can tell you that, a few decades ago, yes— they put all the sped kids in their own class. This included kids with profound disabilities who could not speak or use the toilet even as teenagers, and it included kids with dyslexia.

My sibling & my spouse were in classes like this (both dyslexic). Trust me, it did NOT lead to “better educational outcomes” for the kids who just had an LD. Instead, kids in those classes were stigmatized by peers, and the adults at the school assumed they weren’t capable of much & certainly wouldn’t go to college. It was an awful system.

Now, I agree that kids with extreme needs/profound cognitive or developmental disabilities might do better with their own class/nor mainstreamed. But that’s already happening.

Not necessarily. It’s cheaper for districts to put even those with significant needs in a regular classroom (claiming LRE), but they’re doing everyone a disservice by putting a kid with significant behavioral problems in with everyone else.

Just last week on AEM, a parent was asking for advice because her child has been violently attacked TWICE by a sped student (one attack was choking, both incidents blood was drawn). And so many people argued that the violent child should remain in the room! INSANITY.

[Anonymous]

If a 1:1 aide is needed, the kid doesn’t belong in gen ed.

[Anonymous]

I feel like this might be a plug to lobby our great governor, VBOE to look at the jlarc report and fund public education properly, but some of you just look down on public ed so much that we have to fight over the crumbs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel like this might be a plug to lobby our great governor, VBOE to look at the jlarc report and fund public education properly, but some of you just look down on public ed so much that we have to fight over the crumbs.

If APS were provided more funding, they’d just spend it on more cabinet positions anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If a 1:1 aide is needed, the kid doesn’t belong in gen ed.

Pretty much any x:1 inside the classroom (and not pullout) doesn't belong in gen ed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like this might be a plug to lobby our great governor, VBOE to look at the jlarc report and fund public education properly, but some of you just look down on public ed so much that we have to fight over the crumbs.

If APS were provided more funding, they’d just spend it on more cabinet positions anyway.

These type of answers assures me that DCUM is not a serious place.