When is a classroom unsafe? How would you handle? Kindergarten DD scratched in face and kicked in back at recess

[Anonymous]

I strongly believe in LRE for students with disabilities. LRE sometimes means placement in a gen ed room, with support. That support is often not supplied, despite the law.

LRE sometimes means a self contained class, or partial inclusion in a gen ed room, or it can mean a therapeutic school. Students who are violent are entitled to FAPE and LRE, but that doesn't mean they are entitled to be in gen ed. This is the crux of the issue. No child or staff member should have to attend school where they are harmed. Students with behavioral and emotional issues are sometimes harming other students and staff. This is not okay. I don't care if a student is being violent because of their disability or not. If they are being violent because of their disability, then they should absolutely still have access to LRE...but LRE for them isn't gen ed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What the heck is wrong with schools?! Is there some reason we can't open more for disciplinary issues? There's a lot of focus on special needs and also gifted kids, but what about the ones who are violent?

What is wrong with the parents sending a kid not ready to be in a social environment without intensive supervision? Maybe schools establish a base-level set of requirements around behavior….. fully potty trained, not aggressive towards others? Until parents reach that a child is in home-school or a private setting?

It seems unreasonable to demand that schools address this kind of behavior. The demand upon schools to raise children is just too much.

Because as a society we've moved beyond warehousing people with disabilities.

Stop bringing disabilities into this! We’re talking about kids who have had little to no discipline at home and don’t know how to behave. It is unfair to kids with disabilities to have them lumped in with this. DS’s friend with Down syndrome is the kindest, sweetest girl I’ve ever met.

Others in this thread brought up IDEA and students with special needs, implying we should eliminate the obligation for public schools to provide appropriate education to students with disabilities.

I think what people are saying is that schools are mixing up special needs and disciplinary issues and then saying IDEA makes you educate them. Separate the two. I absolutely agree that special needs students should be included if possible. I do not think violent students belong in regular schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I strongly believe in LRE for students with disabilities. LRE sometimes means placement in a gen ed room, with support. That support is often not supplied, despite the law.

LRE sometimes means a self contained class, or partial inclusion in a gen ed room, or it can mean a therapeutic school. Students who are violent are entitled to FAPE and LRE, but that doesn't mean they are entitled to be in gen ed. This is the crux of the issue. No child or staff member should have to attend school where they are harmed. Students with behavioral and emotional issues are sometimes harming other students and staff. This is not okay. I don't care if a student is being violent because of their disability or not. If they are being violent because of their disability, then they should absolutely still have access to LRE...but LRE for them isn't gen ed.

If might be, if supports in the gen ed classroom would provide a safe environment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:100% have the school move your child to a different class. The kid who hurt her will disrupt the class, monopolize the teacher’s attention, and take away from everyone’s ability to feel safe and learn all year. The system protects the perpetrator not the victims.

+1

This is true in ANY grade, OP - unfortunately.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Repeated violence in school should be considered a mental disability. Those with disabilities should be taught in a different school. Yes, including those that require so much accommodation that you are literally giving them the answers because of their learning disability. Yes, including the kid that is in 5th grade but globally on a kindergarten level. Yes, including the kid that eats pencils in the back of the classroom because they have an oral fixation. Yes, including the kid with extreme autism that they can’t sit still or stop making random noises. It’s ridiculous. School is a zoo at this point. We need to go back to when we had a class for high students. A class for on grade level and a class for special needs. But no, we have inclusion. Students that do not belong with the other population.

And different schools for the darkies? But equal, of course...

No one is talking about race, so stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Repeated violence in school should be considered a mental disability. Those with disabilities should be taught in a different school. Yes, including those that require so much accommodation that you are literally giving them the answers because of their learning disability. Yes, including the kid that is in 5th grade but globally on a kindergarten level. Yes, including the kid that eats pencils in the back of the classroom because they have an oral fixation. Yes, including the kid with extreme autism that they can’t sit still or stop making random noises. It’s ridiculous. School is a zoo at this point. We need to go back to when we had a class for high students. A class for on grade level and a class for special needs. But no, we have inclusion. Students that do not belong with the other population.

And different schools for the darkies? But equal, of course...

No one is talking about race, so stop.

Got it. So are there other characteristics it's OK to discriminate kids based on, or is it just disabilities? And is it just developmental disabilities, or is OK to discriminate based on physical disabilities, too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I strongly believe in LRE for students with disabilities. LRE sometimes means placement in a gen ed room, with support. That support is often not supplied, despite the law.

LRE sometimes means a self contained class, or partial inclusion in a gen ed room, or it can mean a therapeutic school. Students who are violent are entitled to FAPE and LRE, but that doesn't mean they are entitled to be in gen ed. This is the crux of the issue. No child or staff member should have to attend school where they are harmed. Students with behavioral and emotional issues are sometimes harming other students and staff. This is not okay. I don't care if a student is being violent because of their disability or not. If they are being violent because of their disability, then they should absolutely still have access to LRE...but LRE for them isn't gen ed.

If might be, if supports in the gen ed classroom would provide a safe environment.

We are limited the supports we can bring in unless there is an IEP. Many of these kids in lower grades need one but no one has flagged them yet. IDEA means we have to try some minimal supports and have them fail before we can test for a disability. The change I think is necessary is the time line from noticing behavior to testing should be different perhaps shorter if a kid shows unprovoked violence. As a parent you can a call for testing whenever you want but a teacher can’t. Some parents of violent kids want it immediately some say their kid is fine (probably at home on a tablet they are). There should be some sort of protected plan for kids that are violent like this. There isn’t mostly because of idea. I’m not sure the answer and know I’m not seeing everything but to me an accelerated timeline for screening and testing seems like a good place to start.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I strongly believe in LRE for students with disabilities. LRE sometimes means placement in a gen ed room, with support. That support is often not supplied, despite the law.

LRE sometimes means a self contained class, or partial inclusion in a gen ed room, or it can mean a therapeutic school. Students who are violent are entitled to FAPE and LRE, but that doesn't mean they are entitled to be in gen ed. This is the crux of the issue. No child or staff member should have to attend school where they are harmed. Students with behavioral and emotional issues are sometimes harming other students and staff. This is not okay. I don't care if a student is being violent because of their disability or not. If they are being violent because of their disability, then they should absolutely still have access to LRE...but LRE for them isn't gen ed.

If might be, if supports in the gen ed classroom would provide a safe environment.

What supports do you envision need to be provided in a gen ed room to provide a safe environment? I taught in a room with 2 full time TA's (only provided because my principal and I screamed bloody murder to our school board and upper admins and I said if I didn't get a 2nd aide, I was quitting, which I eventually did because not even that helped, and they still wanted to "give the student more time"), and at any given time there could be up to 4 additional staff (sped teacher, speech teacher, BCBA, principal, sped admin, etc) in the room attempting to de-escalate the violent kids unsuccessfully while the class as a whole (minus 1-2 kids) was evacuated.
We offered specific SEL lessons, choices, visual timers, weighted blankets, fidget toys, stand spots, social stories, social work services several times per week and much more. What more do you feel should be provided that might make the classroom safe enough that violent children could attend and not harm others? We had 6 months of documentation, my principal had been bruised, a sub had been threatened with scissors, I was threatened with being shot, objects had been thrown, items were destroyed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I strongly believe in LRE for students with disabilities. LRE sometimes means placement in a gen ed room, with support. That support is often not supplied, despite the law.

LRE sometimes means a self contained class, or partial inclusion in a gen ed room, or it can mean a therapeutic school. Students who are violent are entitled to FAPE and LRE, but that doesn't mean they are entitled to be in gen ed. This is the crux of the issue. No child or staff member should have to attend school where they are harmed. Students with behavioral and emotional issues are sometimes harming other students and staff. This is not okay. I don't care if a student is being violent because of their disability or not. If they are being violent because of their disability, then they should absolutely still have access to LRE...but LRE for them isn't gen ed.

If might be, if supports in the gen ed classroom would provide a safe environment.

We are limited the supports we can bring in unless there is an IEP. Many of these kids in lower grades need one but no one has flagged them yet. IDEA means we have to try some minimal supports and have them fail before we can test for a disability. The change I think is necessary is the time line from noticing behavior to testing should be different perhaps shorter if a kid shows unprovoked violence. As a parent you can a call for testing whenever you want but a teacher can’t. Some parents of violent kids want it immediately some say their kid is fine (probably at home on a tablet they are). There should be some sort of protected plan for kids that are violent like this. There isn’t mostly because of idea. I’m not sure the answer and know I’m not seeing everything but to me an accelerated timeline for screening and testing seems like a good place to start.

Who told you that? That's absolutely not in IDEA. It sounds like your school district is illegally withholding evaluations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I strongly believe in LRE for students with disabilities. LRE sometimes means placement in a gen ed room, with support. That support is often not supplied, despite the law.

LRE sometimes means a self contained class, or partial inclusion in a gen ed room, or it can mean a therapeutic school. Students who are violent are entitled to FAPE and LRE, but that doesn't mean they are entitled to be in gen ed. This is the crux of the issue. No child or staff member should have to attend school where they are harmed. Students with behavioral and emotional issues are sometimes harming other students and staff. This is not okay. I don't care if a student is being violent because of their disability or not. If they are being violent because of their disability, then they should absolutely still have access to LRE...but LRE for them isn't gen ed.

If might be, if supports in the gen ed classroom would provide a safe environment.

What supports do you envision need to be provided in a gen ed room to provide a safe environment? I taught in a room with 2 full time TA's (only provided because my principal and I screamed bloody murder to our school board and upper admins and I said if I didn't get a 2nd aide, I was quitting, which I eventually did because not even that helped, and they still wanted to "give the student more time"), and at any given time there could be up to 4 additional staff (sped teacher, speech teacher, BCBA, principal, sped admin, etc) in the room attempting to de-escalate the violent kids unsuccessfully while the class as a whole (minus 1-2 kids) was evacuated.
We offered specific SEL lessons, choices, visual timers, weighted blankets, fidget toys, stand spots, social stories, social work services several times per week and much more. What more do you feel should be provided that might make the classroom safe enough that violent children could attend and not harm others? We had 6 months of documentation, my principal had been bruised, a sub had been threatened with scissors, I was threatened with being shot, objects had been thrown, items were destroyed.

I said "might." For some, a 1:1 that can de-escalate behaviors will be sufficient. That won't work for every child, in which case more restrictive placements may be LRE, but several posters here want to simply segregate kids based on disabilities, without regard for potentially effective supports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I strongly believe in LRE for students with disabilities. LRE sometimes means placement in a gen ed room, with support. That support is often not supplied, despite the law.

LRE sometimes means a self contained class, or partial inclusion in a gen ed room, or it can mean a therapeutic school. Students who are violent are entitled to FAPE and LRE, but that doesn't mean they are entitled to be in gen ed. This is the crux of the issue. No child or staff member should have to attend school where they are harmed. Students with behavioral and emotional issues are sometimes harming other students and staff. This is not okay. I don't care if a student is being violent because of their disability or not. If they are being violent because of their disability, then they should absolutely still have access to LRE...but LRE for them isn't gen ed.

If might be, if supports in the gen ed classroom would provide a safe environment.

What supports do you envision need to be provided in a gen ed room to provide a safe environment? I taught in a room with 2 full time TA's (only provided because my principal and I screamed bloody murder to our school board and upper admins and I said if I didn't get a 2nd aide, I was quitting, which I eventually did because not even that helped, and they still wanted to "give the student more time"), and at any given time there could be up to 4 additional staff (sped teacher, speech teacher, BCBA, principal, sped admin, etc) in the room attempting to de-escalate the violent kids unsuccessfully while the class as a whole (minus 1-2 kids) was evacuated.
We offered specific SEL lessons, choices, visual timers, weighted blankets, fidget toys, stand spots, social stories, social work services several times per week and much more. What more do you feel should be provided that might make the classroom safe enough that violent children could attend and not harm others? We had 6 months of documentation, my principal had been bruised, a sub had been threatened with scissors, I was threatened with being shot, objects had been thrown, items were destroyed.

I said "might." For some, a 1:1 that can de-escalate behaviors will be sufficient. That won't work for every child, in which case more restrictive placements may be LRE, but several posters here want to simply segregate kids based on disabilities, without regard for potentially effective supports.

No you are jumping to that conclusion. I think you are taking this very personally for your kids situation. Believe it or not, often a 1 on 1 can be the most restrictive environment from a personal space and autonomy point of view even though the kid is around peers, they do not have freedom. If my ASD kid ever needed a 1 on 1, I would advocate for having him in self contained or smaller class rather than that because I have seen how that relationship works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I strongly believe in LRE for students with disabilities. LRE sometimes means placement in a gen ed room, with support. That support is often not supplied, despite the law.

LRE sometimes means a self contained class, or partial inclusion in a gen ed room, or it can mean a therapeutic school. Students who are violent are entitled to FAPE and LRE, but that doesn't mean they are entitled to be in gen ed. This is the crux of the issue. No child or staff member should have to attend school where they are harmed. Students with behavioral and emotional issues are sometimes harming other students and staff. This is not okay. I don't care if a student is being violent because of their disability or not. If they are being violent because of their disability, then they should absolutely still have access to LRE...but LRE for them isn't gen ed.

If might be, if supports in the gen ed classroom would provide a safe environment.

We are limited the supports we can bring in unless there is an IEP. Many of these kids in lower grades need one but no one has flagged them yet. IDEA means we have to try some minimal supports and have them fail before we can test for a disability. The change I think is necessary is the time line from noticing behavior to testing should be different perhaps shorter if a kid shows unprovoked violence. As a parent you can a call for testing whenever you want but a teacher can’t. Some parents of violent kids want it immediately some say their kid is fine (probably at home on a tablet they are). There should be some sort of protected plan for kids that are violent like this. There isn’t mostly because of idea. I’m not sure the answer and know I’m not seeing everything but to me an accelerated timeline for screening and testing seems like a good place to start.

Who told you that? That's absolutely not in IDEA. It sounds like your school district is illegally withholding evaluations.

Sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Repeated violence in school should be considered a mental disability. Those with disabilities should be taught in a different school. Yes, including those that require so much accommodation that you are literally giving them the answers because of their learning disability. Yes, including the kid that is in 5th grade but globally on a kindergarten level. Yes, including the kid that eats pencils in the back of the classroom because they have an oral fixation. Yes, including the kid with extreme autism that they can’t sit still or stop making random noises. It’s ridiculous. School is a zoo at this point. We need to go back to when we had a class for high students. A class for on grade level and a class for special needs. But no, we have inclusion. Students that do not belong with the other population.

And this, folks, is why we have IDEA.

So you’re okay with op’s dd getting beat up in class then?

You think those are the only two options? Really?

And your solution is . . . ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Repeated violence in school should be considered a mental disability. Those with disabilities should be taught in a different school. Yes, including those that require so much accommodation that you are literally giving them the answers because of their learning disability. Yes, including the kid that is in 5th grade but globally on a kindergarten level. Yes, including the kid that eats pencils in the back of the classroom because they have an oral fixation. Yes, including the kid with extreme autism that they can’t sit still or stop making random noises. It’s ridiculous. School is a zoo at this point. We need to go back to when we had a class for high students. A class for on grade level and a class for special needs. But no, we have inclusion. Students that do not belong with the other population.

And different schools for the darkies? But equal, of course...

No one is talking about race, so stop.

Got it. So are there other characteristics it's OK to discriminate kids based on, or is it just disabilities? And is it just developmental disabilities, or is OK to discriminate based on physical disabilities, too?

How about removing violent kids from gen Ed classrooms? Would that be okay with you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Repeated violence in school should be considered a mental disability. Those with disabilities should be taught in a different school. Yes, including those that require so much accommodation that you are literally giving them the answers because of their learning disability. Yes, including the kid that is in 5th grade but globally on a kindergarten level. Yes, including the kid that eats pencils in the back of the classroom because they have an oral fixation. Yes, including the kid with extreme autism that they can’t sit still or stop making random noises. It’s ridiculous. School is a zoo at this point. We need to go back to when we had a class for high students. A class for on grade level and a class for special needs. But no, we have inclusion. Students that do not belong with the other population.

And different schools for the darkies? But equal, of course...

No one is talking about race, so stop.

Got it. So are there other characteristics it's OK to discriminate kids based on, or is it just disabilities? And is it just developmental disabilities, or is OK to discriminate based on physical disabilities, too?

Your disability doesn't give you carte blanche to beat the crap out of other people. What you call discriminate, everyone else calls consequences.