IEP impact / from Musk & DoE

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Y'all, what's happening is about spending cuts. None of what is going to happen through DOGE is going to result in more $ for special education, either through the states or federally. There will almost certainly be less.

The problems we have mostly don’t stem from lack of money- they stem from incompetence and unwillingness to ask for help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People, he is trying to get rid of DEIA (A for accessibility). Hate the IEP process if you want, ask for reform, but getting rid of the DOE is not the answer unless you secretly want to resegregate school

You mean put all the noisy kids in one room? Yes PLEASE!

This is nasty and ableist. To begin with, having a disability is not one thing. It doesn’t mean someone is loud. It doesn’t mean they’re quiet. Further, having volunteered extensively through more than two decades of parenting, I can tell you that there are plenty of kids without disabilities who are loud and disruptive. And plenty of kids with disabilities who aren’t.

I will also say that I went to a very progressive elementary school that was early to mainstreaming; I think it was extremely beneficial to all of us. We learned inclusiveness, respect, and the inherent value of individuals. Our teachers didn’t have the language and tools that we have today but they had fantastic insight, commitment, and understanding that they were instilling us with values of decency and community. Regressing to a world where people with disabilities are hidden away and treated like criminals is barbaric and doesn’t benefit anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People, he is trying to get rid of DEIA (A for accessibility). Hate the IEP process if you want, ask for reform, but getting rid of the DOE is not the answer unless you secretly want to resegregate school

You mean put all the noisy kids in one room? Yes PLEASE!

This is nasty and ableist. To begin with, having a disability is not one thing. It doesn’t mean someone is loud. It doesn’t mean they’re quiet. Further, having volunteered extensively through more than two decades of parenting, I can tell you that there are plenty of kids without disabilities who are loud and disruptive. And plenty of kids with disabilities who aren’t.

I will also say that I went to a very progressive elementary school that was early to mainstreaming; I think it was extremely beneficial to all of us. We learned inclusiveness, respect, and the inherent value of individuals. Our teachers didn’t have the language and tools that we have today but they had fantastic insight, commitment, and understanding that they were instilling us with values of decency and community. Regressing to a world where people with disabilities are hidden away and treated like criminals is barbaric and doesn’t benefit anyone.

Forced inclusiveness (yes, it’s often forced due to LRE) is great on paper but it’s not benefiting a child with SN most of the time. Especially in the birth-grade 5 range. Children with SN learn differently especially in the early years. That’s just the way it is. Now a few schools choose programs that are easily utilized by all students, but most do not. If they do get those needed programs it’s usually several years in and after much fighting with the system. Precious Time lost.

Also SN students require more attention and time in the classroom. They also require more paperwork and more communication with parents and other professionals. They require more advanced training and skills that aren’t learned with your typical elementary Ed degree. All these things combined means full inclusion really is not best practice for most kids, at least not in the younger grades.

Teachers cannot have 30 students and be expected to do 8 IEPs and several 504s and teach regular ed. They are different learners. That’s not good or bad but it’s very different. These kids need smaller classes, different programs, individualized attention, more routines, thought given to who they should be in a class with when it is time for inclusion, etc etc. I’m all for inclusion when it actually makes sense. It often takes many years of 1:1 hard work and small group 1:2-1:4 work before that makes sense though.

So you can sit around and dream about a fairy tale world where everyone is just forced to deal with each other and it’s great. Meanwhile I’ll be at Larlo’s house teaching them to talk and follow directions because the mom had to pull them out of public preschool because the other kids were too loud and aggressive for Larlo to pay attention.

Oh and contrary to your beliefs Larlo will not be hidden away in Barbaría. They will get 1:1 private services, will spend preschool years attending weekly play groups and summer camps and clinics and have play dates and when they’re ready they will start school with peers. However when they aren’t ready yet I will confidently say no I don’t think so but let’s work on x,y, z and try again next year. They will learn to read, write, spell, do math, learn science, and history, and even foreign language. They will do these things alone and with peers. They will get faded classroom assistance and eventually the kids will learn to love and embrace and accept Larlo, not because they were disruptive and annoying and the kids learned to deal with it- but because those kids could see how hard Larlo worked and how far Larlo had come. They will learn to respect and admire Larlo for their abilities, not their disabilities.

That’s true inclusion. No IEP required.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People, he is trying to get rid of DEIA (A for accessibility). Hate the IEP process if you want, ask for reform, but getting rid of the DOE is not the answer unless you secretly want to resegregate school

You mean put all the noisy kids in one room? Yes PLEASE!

This is nasty and ableist. To begin with, having a disability is not one thing. It doesn’t mean someone is loud. It doesn’t mean they’re quiet. Further, having volunteered extensively through more than two decades of parenting, I can tell you that there are plenty of kids without disabilities who are loud and disruptive. And plenty of kids with disabilities who aren’t.

I will also say that I went to a very progressive elementary school that was early to mainstreaming; I think it was extremely beneficial to all of us. We learned inclusiveness, respect, and the inherent value of individuals. Our teachers didn’t have the language and tools that we have today but they had fantastic insight, commitment, and understanding that they were instilling us with values of decency and community. Regressing to a world where people with disabilities are hidden away and treated like criminals is barbaric and doesn’t benefit anyone.

Forced inclusiveness (yes, it’s often forced due to LRE) is great on paper but it’s not benefiting a child with SN most of the time. Especially in the birth-grade 5 range. Children with SN learn differently especially in the early years. That’s just the way it is. Now a few schools choose programs that are easily utilized by all students, but most do not. If they do get those needed programs it’s usually several years in and after much fighting with the system. Precious Time lost.

Also SN students require more attention and time in the classroom. They also require more paperwork and more communication with parents and other professionals. They require more advanced training and skills that aren’t learned with your typical elementary Ed degree. All these things combined means full inclusion really is not best practice for most kids, at least not in the younger grades.

Teachers cannot have 30 students and be expected to do 8 IEPs and several 504s and teach regular ed. They are different learners. That’s not good or bad but it’s very different. These kids need smaller classes, different programs, individualized attention, more routines, thought given to who they should be in a class with when it is time for inclusion, etc etc. I’m all for inclusion when it actually makes sense. It often takes many years of 1:1 hard work and small group 1:2-1:4 work before that makes sense though.

So you can sit around and dream about a fairy tale world where everyone is just forced to deal with each other and it’s great. Meanwhile I’ll be at Larlo’s house teaching them to talk and follow directions because the mom had to pull them out of public preschool because the other kids were too loud and aggressive for Larlo to pay attention.

Oh and contrary to your beliefs Larlo will not be hidden away in Barbaría. They will get 1:1 private services, will spend preschool years attending weekly play groups and summer camps and clinics and have play dates and when they’re ready they will start school with peers. However when they aren’t ready yet I will confidently say no I don’t think so but let’s work on x,y, z and try again next year. They will learn to read, write, spell, do math, learn science, and history, and even foreign language. They will do these things alone and with peers. They will get faded classroom assistance and eventually the kids will learn to love and embrace and accept Larlo, not because they were disruptive and annoying and the kids learned to deal with it- but because those kids could see how hard Larlo worked and how far Larlo had come. They will learn to respect and admire Larlo for their abilities, not their disabilities.

That’s true inclusion. No IEP required.

Re-read the quote I responded to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“would seek a plan for Congress to abolish the department altogether, which would fulfill a Trump campaign promise.”



Seek a plan for congress to abolish the dept? That’s gonna take 4 years.

And if it doesn’t take 4 years?

What is the point in initiating the plan if you don’t think it will I’ll come to fruition? Just *wanting* this to be reality is bad enough, no?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, our county seems to only spend money *creating* an IEP. They offer scant services, and don’t fulfill them. So maybe some restructuring will be good

I kind of agree. We already pay for outside tutoring/services since the ones provided through our IEP are laughable. Not sure this is going to make much of a difference for us.

Yeah you can afford that. some people can only get services in school. Man you guys are awful people

DP. Stop insulting people instead of addressing their point- which is that funds aren’t going to those kids who can’t afford outside services either. It’s just going to the bureaucratic process. Do you ever read this forum?

[Anonymous]

It might be disruptive in the short term but IDEA remains. The funds will be distributed to the states but perhaps out of a different agency.

[Anonymous]

War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.

[Anonymous]

My child has an IEP and we pay for everything privately. Have never once used it. It won't affect us.

The shortages are so bad that the kids dependent on DOE have gotten nothing for years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My child has an IEP and we pay for everything privately. Have never once used it. It won't affect us.

The shortages are so bad that the kids dependent on DOE have gotten nothing for years.

This.

[Anonymous]

The house may need some serious repairs but that's no reason to ask a burglar to fix it.

[Anonymous]

Red states use the federal funding and support special ed more than you might think.

In a blue state, women are more likely to get prenatal testing for chromosomal differences and do something about it. This isn’t as prevalent in red states. The school systems I’m familiar with put a lot towards their special ed programs and feel strongly about them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My child has an IEP and we pay for everything privately. Have never once used it. It won't affect us.

The shortages are so bad that the kids dependent on DOE have gotten nothing for years.

is your kid at a public or private?

[Anonymous]

Honestly, my child needs an IEP for OT and I’ve been told there aren’t enough resources for him to get more than once monthly check ins with the OT and that I should be thankful for this because he is already performing above grade level. He is a smart kid, with great potential to be an asset to society as an adult, with fine motor delays and dysgraphia. If I didn’t have the money for private OT he’d just grow into an adult who could not write freehand. Maybe in his AI future this won’t actually matter, honestly. But anyways. The IEP services seem to be mainly aimed at helping profoundly disabled children which is laudable, but I see the argument that kids who have the potential to be high achievers should not be moved to the back of the line for services (this includes skimping on gifted services in favor of services for the profoundly disabled). I am not against services for the profoundly disabled, let me be clear. But I think ignoring gifted children or ignoring children who will grow up to be doctors , leaders, etc if they just had a little more help, in favor of giving the most services to children who will not grow up to be as productive, can be seen as problematic. CAN be seen as problematic. Im not advocating for less help for anyone.

Anyways basically the IEP system is already trash , is my point.

[Anonymous]

Say goodbye to any extra support you may have had.