Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not overaccommodation. In the real world, we can pick where we eat. I’m personally hearing impaired and can’t stand loud environments which make conversations difficult. Not to mention the din of background noise is amplified. I know NT introverts who also prefer quiet lunches. In MS, many kids choose to spend lunch in a quiet classroom and no formal accommodations are needed. I know lots of kids who chose the classroom option. At our HS, the kids can also choose where inside or outside to eat lunch. I suspect this is a staffing issue. If my child had a disability, I’d fight for the accommodation. If the school claims to want to address the root cause of needing the accommodation, they should create lunch bunch groups. Our ES had those with the school counselor.

In the real world of elementary school, kids actually can’t pick where they eat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having a SN child in public school has made me completely question the motivations behind special Ed. In theory it makes sense, in practice it’s like “how fast can we traumatize these kids into compliancy because their quirks are annoying…”

I’m parent of 2nd grader who eloped. You put 200 7 year olds in an enclosed space, give them an infusion of sugar, and have maybe 3 adults — it’s going to be bedlam. It’s developmentally normal for them to get as loud and wiggly as their 7 year old bodies will let them. No blame for the kids.

The issue I have is if you already have sensory issues to sounds, smell, lighting, crowds - it’s literally torture.

Our district would rather spend millions of dollars fighting parents in IEP battles then hiring a part-time employee for a few hours to hang out with kids in an empty classroom for 30 min.

It’s was the 90s but we had a quiet lunch option in ES. The “ladies” who hung with us were retired teachers who enjoyed the time with kids and were happy with 2 hours of paid work a few days a week.

The flip side is that parents regularly insist on accommodations that are too difficult in a mainstream setting. Eventually every kid with a 504 or IEP will request a quiet lunch, not just those who actually need it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having a SN child in public school has made me completely question the motivations behind special Ed. In theory it makes sense, in practice it’s like “how fast can we traumatize these kids into compliancy because their quirks are annoying…”

I’m parent of 2nd grader who eloped. You put 200 7 year olds in an enclosed space, give them an infusion of sugar, and have maybe 3 adults — it’s going to be bedlam. It’s developmentally normal for them to get as loud and wiggly as their 7 year old bodies will let them. No blame for the kids.

The issue I have is if you already have sensory issues to sounds, smell, lighting, crowds - it’s literally torture.

Our district would rather spend millions of dollars fighting parents in IEP battles then hiring a part-time employee for a few hours to hang out with kids in an empty classroom for 30 min.

It’s was the 90s but we had a quiet lunch option in ES. The “ladies” who hung with us were retired teachers who enjoyed the time with kids and were happy with 2 hours of paid work a few days a week.

The flip side is that parents regularly insist on accommodations that are too difficult in a mainstream setting. Eventually every kid with a 504 or IEP will request a quiet lunch, not just those who actually need it.

Anonymous wrote:My kids' school does a quiet lunch for kids who prefer to not eat in the cafeteria. Some neurodivergent, some who just prefer quiet. My 1st grader is ADHD and has enjoyed having a quiet place (10 or so kids in the library) to eat each day. He also likes not having to choose who to sit by.

The school is considering ending it due to "skill building" and that the students need to learn to build up their tolerance to the cafeteria, build the executive functioning to decide who to sit by, etc. We cannot overaccommodate, they say, but rather teach children the skills to deal with the things they are uncomfortable with.

What do you think?

Anonymous wrote:Having a SN child in public school has made me completely question the motivations behind special Ed. In theory it makes sense, in practice it’s like “how fast can we traumatize these kids into compliancy because their quirks are annoying…”

I’m parent of 2nd grader who eloped. You put 200 7 year olds in an enclosed space, give them an infusion of sugar, and have maybe 3 adults — it’s going to be bedlam. It’s developmentally normal for them to get as loud and wiggly as their 7 year old bodies will let them. No blame for the kids.

The issue I have is if you already have sensory issues to sounds, smell, lighting, crowds - it’s literally torture.

Our district would rather spend millions of dollars fighting parents in IEP battles then hiring a part-time employee for a few hours to hang out with kids in an empty classroom for 30 min.

It’s was the 90s but we had a quiet lunch option in ES. The “ladies” who hung with us were retired teachers who enjoyed the time with kids and were happy with 2 hours of paid work a few days a week.

Anonymous wrote:Not overaccommodation. In the real world, we can pick where we eat. I’m personally hearing impaired and can’t stand loud environments which make conversations difficult. Not to mention the din of background noise is amplified. I know NT introverts who also prefer quiet lunches. In MS, many kids choose to spend lunch in a quiet classroom and no formal accommodations are needed. I know lots of kids who chose the classroom option. At our HS, the kids can also choose where inside or outside to eat lunch. I suspect this is a staffing issue. If my child had a disability, I’d fight for the accommodation. If the school claims to want to address the root cause of needing the accommodation, they should create lunch bunch groups. Our ES had those with the school counselor.

Anonymous wrote:It's pretty unbearable in the school cafeteria and I say that as a non-neurodiverse person. So I would push for this to continue.