Anonymous wrote:PP: we are motivated and educated parents and often we have gone by ourselves. But there are people in the system who
a) don't understand disabilities and this is where bias plays in.
b) don't understand the interventions needed for specific disabilities, so when you ask for them, you get an arbitrary answer. And then have to come back for another meeting with an expert in tow.

I am also very ragey about those who get screwed and if DS had not been so deeply affected by a profound sense of failure, we would have kept fighting because we know there will be others behind him. Eventually, it became more important to get him to a place where he could rebuild a sense of self-worth.

Oh yeah, I did not mean to suggest anything other than exactly what you say! Just to encourage people not to feel like they can't get anywhere on their own.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps we have an attitude to some parents in reaction to what is so obvious on this thread. So many of you think we're untrained, lazy and stupid. You might know your child better than anyone, but we know our field better than you.

Work on reading comprehension. Nobody said you were untrained. What was said is if someone gets an expert in the field-someone who is a world renowned researcher, clinician and professor, it is ignorant of you to claim to know more and not even listen. Also, research is useless if it isn't published. Publication at least ensures your research methods, stats and sample sizes were decent. Anyone can claim to have conducted a research study.

you proved my point with your condecending comment "work on reading comprehension".
Someone on this thread called SPED professionals untrained using that exact word.

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps we have an attitude to some parents in reaction to what is so obvious on this thread. So many of you think we're untrained, lazy and stupid. You might know your child better than anyone, but we know our field better than you.

Work on reading comprehension. Nobody said you were untrained. What was said is if someone gets an expert in the field-someone who is a world renowned researcher, clinician and professor, it is ignorant of you to claim to know more and not even listen. Also, research is useless if it isn't published. Publication at least ensures your research methods, stats and sample sizes were decent. Anyone can claim to have conducted a research study.

Anonymous wrote:

I am surprised at how little training these "professionals" get or need. And many of them are lazy. They do nothing to keep up with best practices.

Then perhaps you should homeschool.

Perhaps we have an attitude to some parents in reaction to what is so obvious on this thread. So many of you think we're untrained, lazy and stupid. You might know your child better than anyone, but we know our field better than you.

PP: we are motivated and educated parents and often we have gone by ourselves. But there are people in the system who
a) don't understand disabilities and this is where bias plays in.
b) don't understand the interventions needed for specific disabilities, so when you ask for them, you get an arbitrary answer. And then have to come back for another meeting with an expert in tow.

I am also very ragey about those who get screwed and if DS had not been so deeply affected by a profound sense of failure, we would have kept fighting because we know there will be others behind him. Eventually, it became more important to get him to a place where he could rebuild a sense of self-worth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP: here. I came to one IEP meeting with one of the top SLPs in the country who had been testing DS for years. Made no difference. The teacher who opposed services is now a principal at a DCPS school because she could teach reading better. We lost two years of interventions because the team believed her.

At another meeting, we brought the neuropsych who has published one of the top books on ADHD and executive functioning. The SPED teacher mentioned above (who was working on his masters in SPED and with one year of experience) and the school psychologist (both still in DCPS) completely blew off our expert saying that they knew better and DS was ineligible for services. DS had services since age 4. Really? How many hundreds of people have you tested? Are you an expert on dyslexia?

How many other kids have these three negatively affected?

Such intransigence, arrogance and the ignorance of the school staff, supported by a school administration that won't acknowledge others' lack of knowledge.

I think about all the kids in DCPS who get to high school and cannot read and wonder how many of them have unidentified disabilities.

What makes me ragey is those of us who could afford lawyers could screw these people over big time, but those who can't afford lawyers get screwed. It would not hold up in court to say they know better when their credentials are way below the level of your experts and when you have testing data that is better than theirs.

Actually a motivated and educated parent could get quite far pro se if they are truly being arbitrary in their determinations. The basic standards are not hard to understand - although the procedure is trickier to be sure.

Anonymous wrote:PP: here. I came to one IEP meeting with one of the top SLPs in the country who had been testing DS for years. Made no difference. The teacher who opposed services is now a principal at a DCPS school because she could teach reading better. We lost two years of interventions because the team believed her.

At another meeting, we brought the neuropsych who has published one of the top books on ADHD and executive functioning. The SPED teacher mentioned above (who was working on his masters in SPED and with one year of experience) and the school psychologist (both still in DCPS) completely blew off our expert saying that they knew better and DS was ineligible for services. DS had services since age 4. Really? How many hundreds of people have you tested? Are you an expert on dyslexia?

How many other kids have these three negatively affected?

Such intransigence, arrogance and the ignorance of the school staff, supported by a school administration that won't acknowledge others' lack of knowledge.

I think about all the kids in DCPS who get to high school and cannot read and wonder how many of them have unidentified disabilities.

What makes me ragey is those of us who could afford lawyers could screw these people over big time, but those who can't afford lawyers get screwed. It would not hold up in court to say they know better when their credentials are way below the level of your experts and when you have testing data that is better than theirs.

PP: here. I came to one IEP meeting with one of the top SLPs in the country who had been testing DS for years. Made no difference. The teacher who opposed services is now a principal at a DCPS school because she could teach reading better. We lost two years of interventions because the team believed her.

At another meeting, we brought the neuropsych who has published one of the top books on ADHD and executive functioning. The SPED teacher mentioned above (who was working on his masters in SPED and with one year of experience) and the school psychologist (both still in DCPS) completely blew off our expert saying that they knew better and DS was ineligible for services. DS had services since age 4. Really? How many hundreds of people have you tested? Are you an expert on dyslexia?

How many other kids have these three negatively affected?

Such intransigence, arrogance and the ignorance of the school staff, supported by a school administration that won't acknowledge others' lack of knowledge.

I think about all the kids in DCPS who get to high school and cannot read and wonder how many of them have unidentified disabilities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SLP is terrible at our school. Despite documented concerns for years, she denies any speech issues and says its attention. After several evaluations and years of therapy, she is the only one commenting this. Our special ed teacher seems great but most I have met are not and most general ed teachers because they don't know each disorder generally lump all SN kids together and assume the worst vs. the best. Many don't like parents who are involved and advocate.

I am wondering if your kid is at the same school as mine. She was obsessed with attention. Mainstream TEACHER who had my kid all day agreed the issue was language and not attention, but miss know it all could not let it go even when her own testing showed otherwise. I basically (in front of the IEP team) told her we see some of the top people in the country and even the world and they feel our child needs SLT and attention is not the issue. We have documentation of this in the file. Some of them are highly regarded researchers and professors. What makes you think you know more than they do? Please share your research and publications on the subject matter.

Most of the school SLPs my child had over the years were fine to very good.

But the very first one we encountered told me that she had done her own research and developed her own way of addressing apraxia (which was not at all current or evidence based). I used a variant of your line about research, etc in a meeting -- she was unfazed. Simply replied that she was too busy to publish her research but she could prove that her method worked better.

I'd call bullshit. She hasn't published in a peer reviewed journal. Most people with publications in those journals are pretty dam busy. What a cocky shit. Sorry.

Follow this The U.S. Supreme Court announced Thursday that it will hear a potentially groundbreaking case brought by a Douglas County couple who claim that their autistic son was not provided an adequate education in the public school system as required by federal law.

I am surprised at how little training these "professionals" get or need. And many of them are lazy. They do nothing to keep up with best practices.

"People in public education have no clue"

This. Our last school OT told us that our child's only problem was a "bad attitude," notwithstanding piles of outside assessments showing otherwise. WTF - of all the people who should understand that kids do well when they can and don't do well when something is holding them back, shouldn't it be an OT?

DCPS was very stingy giving us speech language services and when my DS finally was given services in ES, he was in a group. The SLP commented to us (who had sent him for private services in the meantime) that he knew all the drills and did them well. He was even showing the the other kids. Which begs the question: then what were you doing for my kid to meet HIS needs?

Going back to the original poster, in DCPS teachers, including special ed teachers have a bias about SN kids. In most cases, the kids they meet are intellectually challenged, physically disabled or on the spectrum. So combine that with a pretty low bar for students in the system, expectations are really low.

DS's auditory processing disorder is a form of dyslexia. But he is GTLD. GTLD? "Must be on the spectrum". My kid is not and never has been. And everyone is surprised that he is social and has friends. And then the bias comes in. "Not on the spectrum? Then he only needs accommodations. He can't be disabled."

But DS has a very common disability. It is thought that 1 in 5 people have dyslexia. He can read. He is the poster boy for interventions that work. But it is slow and writing is a problem. One hour to write 10 sentences. Because it is about organizing language in the brain. And it will ALWAYS be this way. Richard Branson has managed to build the entire Virgin empire by getting others to help him deal with things that involve reading and writing language. But he is the first to admit that in school he was a failure.

The newish DCPS Special Education program guide only has pictures of the most severely disabled kids. I think this reinforces bias. Why would any teacher believe a student needs special ed if you don't "look" different? Wouldn't it have been great if they had a picture of kid working with the Wilson Reading Program?
.
http://dcps.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dcps/publication/attachments/Family%20Programs%20and%20Resources%20Guide%2016-17.pdf

DS was put into a class of much slower kids in MS and was pulling As. I asked the teacher whether this was performance grades or participation grades. She was honest and said participation grades. He was then mainstreamed with co-teachers and it went much better. But the amount of reading and written work was swamping him.

Supposedly 1 in 5 people have dyslexia and can learn to read/write with correct interventions. But it is a disability and it does affect academic performance. So often we heard, "DS is so smart. Can't he keep up?" We kept saying "Can't you make reasonable requests so he can achieve progress, but not be forced to perform under his ability or pushed to meet an academic load that ensures failure?"

People in public education have no clue. At our last public high school, the SPED teacher told my son to his face that he was lazy. He was supposed to be teaching writing and building his confidence. We have been driven out of the system. (Yes, we had a lawyer and he suggested to spend our money on private school instead of battling it out.)

I applaud those educators who are willing to learn more about their students' needs and try to overcome their assumptions and biases. I have even more respect for special educators who teach other teachers what they need to do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SLP is terrible at our school. Despite documented concerns for years, she denies any speech issues and says its attention. After several evaluations and years of therapy, she is the only one commenting this. Our special ed teacher seems great but most I have met are not and most general ed teachers because they don't know each disorder generally lump all SN kids together and assume the worst vs. the best. Many don't like parents who are involved and advocate.

I am wondering if your kid is at the same school as mine. She was obsessed with attention. Mainstream TEACHER who had my kid all day agreed the issue was language and not attention, but miss know it all could not let it go even when her own testing showed otherwise. I basically (in front of the IEP team) told her we see some of the top people in the country and even the world and they feel our child needs SLT and attention is not the issue. We have documentation of this in the file. Some of them are highly regarded researchers and professors. What makes you think you know more than they do? Please share your research and publications on the subject matter.

OMG. Not the OP here but we encountered the same type of issue in our school system. Outside evaluations (multiple evaluations that showed the same speech-language issues) and input from top professionals from top institutions (not hand-picked private professionals) didn't matter to our school system - they insisted against all evidence that DC didn't have speech-language issues at all. It's maddening.

Your private evaluations may show that there is a speech-language issue, but that doesn't mean your child will qualify for service. The SLPs are bound by certain qualification criteria. Other students may benefit from treatment, but that doesn't mean we can provide service in the schools. Sadly, that is what private therapy is for. Also, speech-pathologists in the county are not allowed to qualify a student based on assessments completed by a profession who is not an SLP. Psychologist often use tests that are more of a screening and not specific enough to language. So, they are required to do further testing even if they'd like to provide service. Believe me, testing takes a long time and takes the student away from instruction. We'd love to use your testing from the private psych, but simply are not allowed to. A private SLP may identify a speech-language weakness, but if the scores don't meat qualification criteria (which are very low), then our hands are tied. Not receiving school service is not an indication that your child would not benefit from treatment. We are simply limited to providing service only to those students whose difficulties can be identified as a disability which negatively impacts education and requires the specialized service of an SLP. As students reach MS and HS, they have more academic English classes and we are not allowed to bill for services which can reasonably be provided by someone else. Sometimes, that is the English teacher. For instance, we are not supposed to make IEP goals for reading even though SLPs have extensive training in this area, but MCPS have reading specialist who can target this area and they are easier to come by. There is always an SLP shortage.

We turned in several evaluations including a recent one from this summer from an SLP. The school SLP said she didn't see an language issue despite this child having serious language issues and only recently began talking. She was very clear she was not going to assist and was very annoyed we were even asking for services. It made no sense when the primary issue is language, the teachers supported the request and the SLP is saying that the test scores are fine (when they are not).

I can't really comment on that without knowing more details. Sorry. I do agree that some SLPs are less motivated than others. Unfortunately, caseloads typically grow, often substantially, over the course of the year and the SLP does not get additional help. So, more work in less time. Allocations for schools are made in January and a lot can change by the end of the year. Add in medical billing, IEP meetings, Speech Service meetings, paperwork, and prep time and you're left with barely any time to actually provide service. It's very frustrating. I am sorry that you've had a hard time.

There is no excuse for a child struggling verbally (and non-verbally) in speech to not get services. Sadly, at this point, even if they offer it to us, we will decline as I don't trust her to do it properly. Its your job to manage it all.