A general question about charters and SN students:

Does PCSB provide the extra funds needed to meet everything specified in every student's IEP (for example, if extra time is needed by students, do they provide funding to cover staff salary for extra time) as well as providing the extra funds needed for documenting, tracking and everything else needed to manage and administer a SN program in a charter? It sounds like there is a whole lot of additional effort and staff resources needed on the part of any school serving SN students.

Next question: Do they fund charters to a comparable level to what is spent within DCPS for each SN student? As I understand it, DCPS pays a considerable amount of money for many SN students to send them out of state to specialty schools, because DCPS cannot meet their needs.

^It sounds like the problems with Sp Ed at BASIS mostly has to do with filing and maintaining records of IEPs which is a multi step process but not that complicated. It's mostly "paper shuffling" but if they cannot deal with just the procedural issues involving paperwork, it certainly brings into question how well they administer the services and/or accommodations stipulated in kids' IEPs and 504 Plans.

BASIS sounds terribly disorganized.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I found the following two paragraphs -- one from each article -- to be thought-provoking:

"Historically, DCPS has not done a spectacular job of providing great general education for students," Beers said. "If you get to middle school and are reading at a third- and fourth-grade level and you don't know what's going on in the class because you can't keep up with the content, you act out behaviorally. Then you get identified as a student who has emotional disabilities when the reality is that we didn't provide the upfront education."

4. Students with disabilities were placed in a remedial classroom set up for students who are at risk of academic failure but not for students with disabilities (entitled the Targeted Intervention Program –TIP). These students did not appear to receive specialized instruction hours for reading prescribed in their IEPs,

Here's a thought: Perhaps some of those middle schoolers reading at a third- and fourth-grade level who have been misidentified as disabled turned up at BASIS DC, and the staff at BASIS recognized that, rather than suffering from emotional or learning disabilities, these students needed remedial instruction.

IEP are legally binding documents. Teachers can't defy them willy-nilly.

It didn't sound like they were ignoring them willy-nilly:

1. Most of the documented IEPs, as well as accompanying notes and minutes that included decisions that altered the plan or established that the services were not needed, were either missing entirely from the students’ file folders or were not signed by the parent and/or the school's administration,

2. The student files at the school and the files found in the EasyIEP/ Special Education Database System (SEDS) maintained by OSSE do not match. SEDS is the system of record for IEPs of students with disabilities, and it is state policy that all LEAs maintain in SEDS current and accurate records,

In other words, the IEPs were changed in the context of an IEP meeting, but minutes were not taken, administrators and parents failed to sign the revised IEPs, the revised IEPs were not entered into SEDS, etc.

Anonymous wrote:I found the following two paragraphs -- one from each article -- to be thought-provoking:

"Historically, DCPS has not done a spectacular job of providing great general education for students," Beers said. "If you get to middle school and are reading at a third- and fourth-grade level and you don't know what's going on in the class because you can't keep up with the content, you act out behaviorally. Then you get identified as a student who has emotional disabilities when the reality is that we didn't provide the upfront education."

4. Students with disabilities were placed in a remedial classroom set up for students who are at risk of academic failure but not for students with disabilities (entitled the Targeted Intervention Program –TIP). These students did not appear to receive specialized instruction hours for reading prescribed in their IEPs,

Here's a thought: Perhaps some of those middle schoolers reading at a third- and fourth-grade level who have been misidentified as disabled turned up at BASIS DC, and the staff at BASIS recognized that, rather than suffering from emotional or learning disabilities, these students needed remedial instruction.

IEP are legally binding documents. Teachers can't defy them willy-nilly.

Parent of thriving SN student at Basis here. FYI: Basis has hired new and additional special ed staff for 2013-2014.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not so.
My ELL child was struggling in his English language class, and the teacher was totally oblivious to the fact he was not understanding the material. During a meeting she simply told us she had no experience with ELL students. After almost 3 months of meeting with admin, with the help of an inside person, my child was finally placed with another classroom teacher 2 years below grade level, who proved to be excellent and helped my child with English language skills. This past year, the school did not have anything close to Read 180, which is the norm in middle schools. I truly hope BASIS hires a remedial English teacher.

Why don't you pay for remedial help yourself or transfer your kid? Duh! I wouldn't leave my child's education up to a public school system who's not doing it right. Sure, they should be, but while that is stalemated what's happening to your kid. No way would I just sit pissed off while my child wasn't served. What did you do, PP? Waiting for the government to do right by your kid is time wasted. FWIW- I have a ELL kid (adopted) who was doing poorly in a DC charter. The services were non-existent. Guess what? I got my child outside help. He's better off now. Stop waiting for the world to hand you a better way for child. Hand yourself a better way. Also, Basis is hard as hell. Not for everyone. A lot of kids are not proper fits. That's the truth. Just cause DCPS sucks, don't expect Basis to be a fix-all. It's too intense for many kids.

Basis is a public charter school. It has an obligation to educate all students. Like other public schools, charters do not get to pick and choose which kids they take. If a child is a special ed student, Basis has an obligation to provide access and special instruction to level the playing field. Basis can not simply say, "we are hard, you can't hack it, leave" as you suggest.

In the same way, Basis has an obligation to serve ELL students. They cannot have the attitude you seem to that the school may be too hard for ELL students. They have an obligation to provide services to ELL students the same as any other public school.

You are operating under the mistaken assumption/stigma that special education means "stupid" or ELL means "can't achieve at a rigorous curriculum". I do not have a child that attends Basis, but I have experienced at another school this frame of mind. Many special education students can achieve adequately at a rigorous curriculum if provided the proper accommodations and instructional support. Many ELL students are extremely smart and can succeed at a rigorous curriculum if given proper support.

Also, please stop berating the PP for not moving the child out of Basis. Many of us can't afford special ed type services outside of school (don't have money or don't have insurance reimbursement for therapy). In any case, often the few hours of special private services outside of school can't make up for what a child needs consistently throughout the school day.

Anonymous wrote:Not so.
My ELL child was struggling in his English language class, and the teacher was totally oblivious to the fact he was not understanding the material. During a meeting she simply told us she had no experience with ELL students. After almost 3 months of meeting with admin, with the help of an inside person, my child was finally placed with another classroom teacher 2 years below grade level, who proved to be excellent and helped my child with English language skills. This past year, the school did not have anything close to Read 180, which is the norm in middle schools. I truly hope BASIS hires a remedial English teacher.

Why don't you pay for remedial help yourself or transfer your kid? Duh! I wouldn't leave my child's education up to a public school system who's not doing it right. Sure, they should be, but while that is stalemated what's happening to your kid. No way would I just sit pissed off while my child wasn't served. What did you do, PP? Waiting for the government to do right by your kid is time wasted. FWIW- I have a ELL kid (adopted) who was doing poorly in a DC charter. The services were non-existent. Guess what? I got my child outside help. He's better off now. Stop waiting for the world to hand you a better way for child. Hand yourself a better way. Also, Basis is hard as hell. Not for everyone. A lot of kids are not proper fits. That's the truth. Just cause DCPS sucks, don't expect Basis to be a fix-all. It's too intense for many kids.

Yet another interesting article about disproportionality in special ed: Confronting Inequity in Special Education, Part I: Understanding the Problem of Disproportionality (http://www.nasponline.org/publications/cq/mocq381disproportionality.aspx)

Here's an excerpt:

The disproportionality literature tends to focus on the disability categories of mental retardation, learning disabilities, and emotional disabilities, as these are the high-incidence disabilities and constitute over 63% of students eligible for special education (U.S. Department of Education [USDOE], 2009). These are also widely regarded as “judgmental” categories because of relatively vague federal and state disability definitions that necessitate a high degree of professional judgment in making normative comparisons to determine eligibility (Klingner et al., 2005). This has led many to question the validity of these diagnoses as true disabilities and the likelihood of misidentification, particularly in light of the wide variation in identification rates across states and districts. In contrast, diagnoses in the low-incidence categories are rarely challenged because of their physical/medical bases, and because disproportionality is not generally observed in these categories.

In other words, almost two-thirds of special ed students are eligible due to mental retardation, learning disabilities or emotional disabilities, categories with soft eligibility criteria and in which minorities are significantly over-represented. On the other hand, minorities are not over-represented in categories based on objective physical or medical findings.

It would be interesting to know what percentage of special ed students at BASIS DC have learning or emotional disabilities.

Anonymous wrote:Not so.
My ELL child was struggling in his English language class, and the teacher was totally oblivious to the fact he was not understanding the material. During a meeting she simply told us she had no experience with ELL students. After almost 3 months of meeting with admin, with the help of an inside person, my child was finally placed with another classroom teacher 2 years below grade level, who proved to be excellent and helped my child with English language skills. This past year, the school did not have anything close to Read 180, which is the norm in middle schools. I truly hope BASIS hires a remedial English teacher.

Does your ELL child attend BASIS? Is your ELL child also special ed?

Another interesting article about special education in Massachusetts: Disproportionality: A Look at Special Education and Race in the Commonwealth (http://www.doe.mass.edu/research/reports/Edbrief_final.pdf)

Some excerpts:

On average, African American and Hispanic students are found
eligible for special education services at higher rates than their populations would suggest,
while white and Asian students are less likely to be found eligible for special education
relative to the size of their respective populations. This national trend, known simply as
disproportionality, has recently become the subject of greater scrutiny from the U.S.
Department of Education (USDE).

One of the foundations of the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA),
arrived at after decades of education research, is the notion of educating students in the
“least restrictive environment.” That is, students with disabilities learn more in the
general education classroom among their nondisabled peers. They are removed for
specialized instruction only when it is absolutely necessary (i.e. when bringing services into
the classroom would not do the job).

In a recent study by special education professors Beth Harry and Janette Klinger, students
from different cultural backgrounds were found to have different learning styles. When
unsuccessful in general education classrooms, these students were referred for special
education evaluations and subsequently found to have disabilities requiring special
education services. These students were served in more restrictive settings, instructed at a
slower pace, and subjected to lower expectations for skill- and knowledge-building in a less
rigorous curriculum.

Compounding this problem is that once students are identified as
eligible for special education services, they are rarely exited from those services. Therein
lies the central problem of disproportionality: While special education benefits thousands
of students in the Commonwealth, some students are inappropriately identified as disabled
and may actually lose ground rather than benefit from the manner in which such services
are typically provided.

Not so.
My ELL child was struggling in his English language class, and the teacher was totally oblivious to the fact he was not understanding the material. During a meeting she simply told us she had no experience with ELL students. After almost 3 months of meeting with admin, with the help of an inside person, my child was finally placed with another classroom teacher 2 years below grade level, who proved to be excellent and helped my child with English language skills. This past year, the school did not have anything close to Read 180, which is the norm in middle schools. I truly hope BASIS hires a remedial English teacher.

I found the following two paragraphs -- one from each article -- to be thought-provoking:

"Historically, DCPS has not done a spectacular job of providing great general education for students," Beers said. "If you get to middle school and are reading at a third- and fourth-grade level and you don't know what's going on in the class because you can't keep up with the content, you act out behaviorally. Then you get identified as a student who has emotional disabilities when the reality is that we didn't provide the upfront education."

4. Students with disabilities were placed in a remedial classroom set up for students who are at risk of academic failure but not for students with disabilities (entitled the Targeted Intervention Program –TIP). These students did not appear to receive specialized instruction hours for reading prescribed in their IEPs,

Here's a thought: Perhaps some of those middle schoolers reading at a third- and fourth-grade level who have been misidentified as disabled turned up at BASIS DC, and the staff at BASIS recognized that, rather than suffering from emotional or learning disabilities, these students needed remedial instruction.

I don't care. Go on with your life.

D.C. schools try to shrink number of special education students
BY RACHEL BAYE | MAY 15, 2013 AT 5:35 PM

DC Public Schools officials are trying to cut down on the number of students being diagnosed with disabilities and enrolled in special education programs.

The effort is part of the school system and the city's goal of reducing the number of public school students attending "nonpublic schools," relatively pricey private schools and public schools in neighboring Maryland and Virginia school systems paid for by the District.

DCPS enrolls 8,221 special education students, accounting for 18 percent of the schools' population, according to data provided by the school system. Of those, 1,189 attend nonpublic schools.

DCPS would like to cut the number of special education students to roughly 6,800, said Nathaniel Beers, chief of DCPS' Office of Special Education.

The goal stems from a finding by the U.S. Department of Education that the school system tends to overidentify students as special education although they may simply be struggling academically, he said.

A spokesman at the Department of Education said the department has not told DCPS it must reduce the number of students with disabilities.

"Historically, DCPS has not done a spectacular job of providing great general education for students," Beers said. "If you get to middle school and are reading at a third- and fourth-grade level and you don't know what's going on in the class because you can't keep up with the content, you act out behaviorally. Then you get identified as a student who has emotional disabilities when the reality is that we didn't provide the upfront education."

To meet its goal, DCPS is spending some of its special education dollars on social workers and guidance counselors who work with all students to address problems before they escalate into behaviors commonly mistaken for disabilities.

But Judith Sandalow, executive director of the Children's Law Center, warned against thinking about special education students in terms of numbers.

"I don't think it's about percentages," she said. "It's about carefully identifying students." Among the existing special education population, the school system hopes to integrate more students into classes with their nonspecial education peers as often as possible. That will help DCPS meet its goal of having 70 percent of students proficient in math and reading by 2017.

Students from low-income families tend to be particularly susceptible to being misdiagnosed with a disability, and with 77 percent of students qualifying for free and reduced-price meals, DCPS has a particularly high rate of special education participation compared with other urban districts.

"Many children in the District experience high levels of trauma because of living in high concentrations of poverty [and] violence in their homes," Sandalow said.

Basis PCS runs afoul with the Charter Board over special education instruction
The Examiner
By Mark Lerner
July 29, 2013

Olga Khazan, Washington Post, August 15, 2012:

"Basis D.C. was initially met with skepticism. When the school’s founders first applied, staff members and consultants for the D.C. Public Charter School Board worried that the school would not be able to meet the needs of 'low-performing, English-language learners and special education students.'"

It turns out the concerns expressed by the D.C. Public Charter School Board staff were warranted, at least in the area of special education. The PCSB has notified the administrators of Basis Public Charter School of five parent complaints during the school's first year of operation regarding special education services. The charges resulted in the PCSB performing an investigation which included a two day site visit. At the same time Basis PCS hired a company called End-To-End Solutions to develop a Special Education Action Plan. The deficiencies identified by End-To-End were also discovered by the PCSB during their time at the school. The PCSB lists them as:

1. Most of the documented IEPs, as well as accompanying notes and minutes that included decisions that altered the plan or established that the services were not needed, were either missing entirely from the students’ file folders or were not
signed by the parent and/or the school's administration,

2. The student files at the school and the files found in the EasyIEP/ Special Education Database System (SEDS) maintained by OSSE do not match. SEDS is the system of record for IEPs of students with disabilities, and it is state policy that all LEAs maintain in SEDS current and accurate records,

3. Lack of a tracking system (such as service delivery tracking or log system) for special education performance and related services, such as speech and language,

4. Students with disabilities were placed in a remedial classroom set up for students who are at risk of academic failure but not for students with disabilities (entitled the Targeted Intervention Program –TIP). These students did not appear to receive specialized instruction hours for reading prescribed in their IEPs,

5. There was no observable evidence of collaboration between the special education teacher and general education teachers,

6. Staff reported that the school had not by the time of PCSB’s visit provided adequate professional development on special education issues.

The PCSB has added three additional steps to the draft action plan submitted by Basis PCS. The Board is also requiring that the plan be finalized and implemented by August 12, 2013, and that the components of the plan be communicated to the parents of special education students. Furthermore, the Board is planning on scheduling four “check-in’s with Basis PCS throughout the upcoming school year, the first of which will be on-site.

The matter is up for discussion at tonight’s monthly PCSB meeting.