Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

There are laws for gifted services, this AAP, Honors, IB, DE, AP, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So why is clustering allowed. It’s not good for anyone. It essentially creates a class within a class.

So most of you WANT to cluster with the AAP kids, but you DON'T want clustered with the sped kids. Is that right? Makes sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

Private schools are always an option for parents who do not agree with the laws that govern public education.

When the answer to a parent asking why their gen ed student's school year is derailed so that other students get their needs met is don't be poor, don't be surprised when resentment is the result.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

Anonymous wrote:So why is clustering allowed. It’s not good for anyone. It essentially creates a class within a class.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

Private schools are always an option for parents who do not agree with the laws that govern public education.

Give me my child's portion of the money allocated to the school system as a voucher and I will gladly leave.

If FCPS spent close to what private schools charge in tuition, many of these problems would be solved. Private school tuition is generally around $30,000 per year (sometimes more). I think FCPS spends roughly $14,000 per student per year. The answer to so many of these issues is small class sizes across the board. Many of the kids with behavior problems and struggling to keep it together in a small room with 27 other kids. It is just too much. If each class had 18 kids, you would see much less disruption. And more differentiation, and better classroom management. In most cases, all these kids are trapped in a failing system. Stop blaming the kids and start working on how to fix the system -- and the answer isn't to deny a group of kids a proper education. I will also say, that no child should have to be in a classroom with violent children who are throwing, hitting, etc. The standard is Least Restrictive Environment, which for some kids is a contained classroom. It just takes a few years to get there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

Private schools are always an option for parents who do not agree with the laws that govern public education.

Give me my child's portion of the money allocated to the school system as a voucher and I will gladly leave.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

Private schools are always an option for parents who do not agree with the laws that govern public education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

Private schools are always an option for parents who do not agree with the laws that govern public education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

I know about the law, but I do think that schools should maximize a child's educational potential. If that isn't the goal, then what is the goal? The dumbing down of society to the lowest common denominator? I truly want SPED kids to succeed, but I think for society we also need the gifted and advanced kids to suceed as well. One shouldn't be at the expense of the other. Currently the parents have to put in the extra work to get their normal kids to succeed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be sped schools, the way they have AAP centers.

Least Restrictive Environment be like: do I mean nothing to you?

But what about the rights of the other students to learn?

They are still learning… it may not be at the pace you want but that isn’t specified by law. Admin and teachers have to follow the law before the needs of the the other kids. Sorry, it is what it is. You should lobby for more flexibility for students to be transferred to other programs/schools; because now, it is virtually impossible to do that without SPED parents suing the district.

+1 Hey, more opportunity to tell people about the law!!

Schools only must provide a “serviceable Chevrolet,” not a Cadillac, to afford a student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The analogy is often associated with the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case known as Rowley, which said that public education requires only a “basic floor of opportunity,” not that schools “maximize” a child’s educational potential. The “Chevy vs. Cadillac” analogy was coined and used by lower courts after Rowley, and suggests that schools need only provide a bare minimum of services to afford a student FAPE.

Anonymous wrote:My child's worst year was when a supposedly NT child kept having behavioral issues and the teacher was at a loss to handle because the parents denied anything was wrong. This child continually lost it in class, was defiant and disruptive to everyone and the parents did nothing to control the behavior.

It's not the kids with IEPs that are the issue. Having an IEP means the school and the parents recognize there's a challenge and are working on it. The worst is those parents who deny anything is going on.