Anonymous wrote:There is enough money. It is the way they choose to spend it. See Reid's staff. See legal expenses instead of receiving federal funds.

Ok, how much money do you THINK it will cost?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our ES had to go into a Hold the other day because a kid from a self-contained room eloped and stripped down naked and was streaking through the hallways.

Flame away, but that kid does not belong in a regular elementary school, self-contained or otherwise.

Perhaps not, but it is strange that you're using an example that doesn't necessarily involve a serious safety risk or ineffective educational environment.

Regardless, the family would probably gladly accept private placement.

+100, you think the budget is high now. Imagine the new budget after approving the cost of paying for private placement for all these kids.

Maybe not if we just admit it’s day care rather than pretending it is school or that they are ever going to be gainfully employed.

I assume you’re talking about the severely disabled. Even in these private institutions they would learn the same skills they will with FCPS: tie their shoes, write their names, count to 10, shake someone’s hand - they don’t have the same expectations as a typical child, even within FCPS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our ES had to go into a Hold the other day because a kid from a self-contained room eloped and stripped down naked and was streaking through the hallways.

Flame away, but that kid does not belong in a regular elementary school, self-contained or otherwise.

Perhaps not, but it is strange that you're using an example that doesn't necessarily involve a serious safety risk or ineffective educational environment.

Regardless, the family would probably gladly accept private placement.

+100, you think the budget is high now. Imagine the new budget after approving the cost of paying for private placement for all these kids.

Maybe not if we just admit it’s day care rather than pretending it is school or that they are ever going to be gainfully employed.

There is enough money. It is the way they choose to spend it. See Reid's staff. See legal expenses instead of receiving federal funds.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our ES had to go into a Hold the other day because a kid from a self-contained room eloped and stripped down naked and was streaking through the hallways.

Flame away, but that kid does not belong in a regular elementary school, self-contained or otherwise.

Perhaps not, but it is strange that you're using an example that doesn't necessarily involve a serious safety risk or ineffective educational environment.

Regardless, the family would probably gladly accept private placement.

+100, you think the budget is high now. Imagine the new budget after approving the cost of paying for private placement for all these kids.

There are not enough private placements for the kids waiting for one and many of the options for them are pretty awful. Most of the private options people know about will not take kids with aggressive behaviors or emotionally disturbed kids. The ones that do are pretty spartan and not great places. Parents don’t want their kids there. It is an ugly situation over all.

We could, of course, make good schools for kids with special needs. But a lot of people aren't interested in doing things that don't have a direct and immediate impact on their own kids.

Again, too much money. Taxes would sky rocket, and many of the people who pay taxes don’t even have kids in the school system. They have no incentive to approve such increases.

You'd think more people would have a sense of morals. But you're right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our ES had to go into a Hold the other day because a kid from a self-contained room eloped and stripped down naked and was streaking through the hallways.

Flame away, but that kid does not belong in a regular elementary school, self-contained or otherwise.

Perhaps not, but it is strange that you're using an example that doesn't necessarily involve a serious safety risk or ineffective educational environment.

Regardless, the family would probably gladly accept private placement.

+100, you think the budget is high now. Imagine the new budget after approving the cost of paying for private placement for all these kids.

There are not enough private placements for the kids waiting for one and many of the options for them are pretty awful. Most of the private options people know about will not take kids with aggressive behaviors or emotionally disturbed kids. The ones that do are pretty spartan and not great places. Parents don’t want their kids there. It is an ugly situation over all.

We could, of course, make good schools for kids with special needs. But a lot of people aren't interested in doing things that don't have a direct and immediate impact on their own kids.

Again, too much money. Taxes would sky rocket, and many of the people who pay taxes don’t even have kids in the school system. They have no incentive to approve such increases.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our ES had to go into a Hold the other day because a kid from a self-contained room eloped and stripped down naked and was streaking through the hallways.

Flame away, but that kid does not belong in a regular elementary school, self-contained or otherwise.

Perhaps not, but it is strange that you're using an example that doesn't necessarily involve a serious safety risk or ineffective educational environment.

Regardless, the family would probably gladly accept private placement.

+100, you think the budget is high now. Imagine the new budget after approving the cost of paying for private placement for all these kids.

There are not enough private placements for the kids waiting for one and many of the options for them are pretty awful. Most of the private options people know about will not take kids with aggressive behaviors or emotionally disturbed kids. The ones that do are pretty spartan and not great places. Parents don’t want their kids there. It is an ugly situation over all.

We could, of course, make good schools for kids with special needs. But a lot of people aren't interested in doing things that don't have a direct and immediate impact on their own kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our ES had to go into a Hold the other day because a kid from a self-contained room eloped and stripped down naked and was streaking through the hallways.

Flame away, but that kid does not belong in a regular elementary school, self-contained or otherwise.

Perhaps not, but it is strange that you're using an example that doesn't necessarily involve a serious safety risk or ineffective educational environment.

Regardless, the family would probably gladly accept private placement.

+100, you think the budget is high now. Imagine the new budget after approving the cost of paying for private placement for all these kids.

There are not enough private placements for the kids waiting for one and many of the options for them are pretty awful. Most of the private options people know about will not take kids with aggressive behaviors or emotionally disturbed kids. The ones that do are pretty spartan and not great places. Parents don’t want their kids there. It is an ugly situation over all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our ES had to go into a Hold the other day because a kid from a self-contained room eloped and stripped down naked and was streaking through the hallways.

Flame away, but that kid does not belong in a regular elementary school, self-contained or otherwise.

Perhaps not, but it is strange that you're using an example that doesn't necessarily involve a serious safety risk or ineffective educational environment.

Regardless, the family would probably gladly accept private placement.

+100, you think the budget is high now. Imagine the new budget after approving the cost of paying for private placement for all these kids.

Irony: I've know two families that fought to keep their child mainstreamed while sending their other child to what was then "GT." They wanted the struggling child in the regular education system. These kids were not disruptive, but were very, very slow learners. DS was in a class with one who needed lots and lots of extra help. This was second grade and it was okay because there was another teacher there, but she ended up elsewhere after a few years. She needed more special help than most.
The irony was that they wanted their other child in an accelerated class.

Anonymous wrote:Our ES had to go into a Hold the other day because a kid from a self-contained room eloped and stripped down naked and was streaking through the hallways.

Flame away, but that kid does not belong in a regular elementary school, self-contained or otherwise.

Perhaps not, but it is strange that you're using an example that doesn't necessarily involve a serious safety risk or ineffective educational environment.

Regardless, the family would probably gladly accept private placement.

Our ES had to go into a Hold the other day because a kid from a self-contained room eloped and stripped down naked and was streaking through the hallways.

Flame away, but that kid does not belong in a regular elementary school, self-contained or otherwise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cutting Gatehouse staff by 50% might free up funding for classroom instruction and help.

The bigger iissue is that whether it’s right or fair to the other kids, the IEP kids have way more legal rights than kids without IEPs and often their parents are very well-versed in disability law. The whole situation has gone off the rails - of course students with disabilities should have rights and an education but IDEA/LRE has not done enough to protect the rights of non-disabled children. Too many kids are “mainstreamed” that should be in a self-contained environment.

Before IDEA/LRE, kids with any issues could be placed in a special class that ended up acting like a warehouse where none of the kids learned. Any type of learning issue or slightly disruptive behavior could be a ticket to no real education. The law was supposed to prevent that from happening.

Somehow that has turned into a situation where parents who want to deny their kid has issues can make it hard to move a kid into a specialized class and parents with kids who are cognitively 3 when they are physically 13 think that the schools should be pouring money into specialized programs so that their kid can learn to read. The public schools became responsible for the care and welfare of severely disabled kids who don’t have the ability to learn, kids with severe emotional needs, kids with moderate to minor learning issues and general education. The cost for education skyrocketed.

There is no space in the SPED classes because there is no oney to pay for the Teachers and Aides because we are “educating” everyone, including kids who cannot be educated. And yes, I know typing that is awful but instead of using different funds to care for kids who cannot learn, we are spending education dollars to pay for medical services, personal care services, and education services. That limits the money and spaces for kids with emotional and learning issues who could learn if provided the proper settings. That pushes into the regular classroom and limits the ability for kids without learning or emotional issues to learn.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cutting Gatehouse staff by 50% might free up funding for classroom instruction and help.

The bigger iissue is that whether it’s right or fair to the other kids, the IEP kids have way more legal rights than kids without IEPs and often their parents are very well-versed in disability law. The whole situation has gone off the rails - of course students with disabilities should have rights and an education but IDEA/LRE has not done enough to protect the rights of non-disabled children. Too many kids are “mainstreamed” that should be in a self-contained environment.

There isn’t enough money or resources for them all to be in self-contained environments, so here we are, which is true across the US. Plus, the parents need to approve the lower environment, so you can take that up with the federal government.

I do agree that many students are misplaced, but this is not a problem the government seems to want to fix, so…

Anonymous wrote:Cutting Gatehouse staff by 50% might free up funding for classroom instruction and help.

The bigger iissue is that whether it’s right or fair to the other kids, the IEP kids have way more legal rights than kids without IEPs and often their parents are very well-versed in disability law. The whole situation has gone off the rails - of course students with disabilities should have rights and an education but IDEA/LRE has not done enough to protect the rights of non-disabled children. Too many kids are “mainstreamed” that should be in a self-contained environment.