Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child was in a class with a completely out of control child. It was a mess and it very much negatively impacted the learning opportunities for the entire class. The child was frequently removed and taken to a calming down room. We definitely felt like the rest of the class was sacrificed for the sake of inclusion and nobody was happy about it and it was really too much for the school to handle, although they tried mightily. I am a supporter of inclusion but inclusion for inclusion’s sake is not helpful for anyone, nor is it the intent of the IDEA law.

Yeah, well neither is locking SN kids in padded rooms. I don’t know why some posters are making connections between inclusion and seclusion. All the SN schools that DC sends kids with behavior problems to (so non-inclusive, segregated facilities who take kids with severe behavior problems) have seclusion rooms. Inclusion is not causing the behavior problems and seclusion is not solving them.

Do other special needs kids and faculty need relief from outburst/threats etc? I have no doubt seclusion could be abused or over used, but what do you suggest is the appropriate mechanism if a child is acting in a way that warrants some kind of intervention ?

These rooms have nothing to do with inclusion and are the opposite of inclusion, really. You know what’s cheap and easy? Locking a kid in a room. You know what’s expensive and requires effort & trained professionals and is evidence-based? Detailed behavioral observations and plans based on those behaviors, frequent individual counseling, qualified teachers and aides with enough staffing to follow the students behavioral plans, etc.

Maybe inclusion wasn't the greatest idea if it spreads resources super thin?

That does sound incredibly expensive.

It is expensive and, sadly, the per-pupil funding for any school -- public or public charter -- doesn't come close to covering the expenses involved. The shortfall causes schools to have to either underpay, understaff, undertrain, turn-away high-needs students, or some combination. The schools that do take on more of the SN students than most, draw attention and get hammered when what they're doing is better than alternatives.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child was in a class with a completely out of control child. It was a mess and it very much negatively impacted the learning opportunities for the entire class. The child was frequently removed and taken to a calming down room. We definitely felt like the rest of the class was sacrificed for the sake of inclusion and nobody was happy about it and it was really too much for the school to handle, although they tried mightily. I am a supporter of inclusion but inclusion for inclusion’s sake is not helpful for anyone, nor is it the intent of the IDEA law.

Yeah, well neither is locking SN kids in padded rooms. I don’t know why some posters are making connections between inclusion and seclusion. All the SN schools that DC sends kids with behavior problems to (so non-inclusive, segregated facilities who take kids with severe behavior problems) have seclusion rooms. Inclusion is not causing the behavior problems and seclusion is not solving them.

Do other special needs kids and faculty need relief from outburst/threats etc? I have no doubt seclusion could be abused or over used, but what do you suggest is the appropriate mechanism if a child is acting in a way that warrants some kind of intervention ?

These rooms have nothing to do with inclusion and are the opposite of inclusion, really. You know what’s cheap and easy? Locking a kid in a room. You know what’s expensive and requires effort & trained professionals and is evidence-based? Detailed behavioral observations and plans based on those behaviors, frequent individual counseling, qualified teachers and aides with enough staffing to follow the students behavioral plans, etc.

That does sound incredibly expensive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child was in a class with a completely out of control child. It was a mess and it very much negatively impacted the learning opportunities for the entire class. The child was frequently removed and taken to a calming down room. We definitely felt like the rest of the class was sacrificed for the sake of inclusion and nobody was happy about it and it was really too much for the school to handle, although they tried mightily. I am a supporter of inclusion but inclusion for inclusion’s sake is not helpful for anyone, nor is it the intent of the IDEA law.

Yeah, well neither is locking SN kids in padded rooms. I don’t know why some posters are making connections between inclusion and seclusion. All the SN schools that DC sends kids with behavior problems to (so non-inclusive, segregated facilities who take kids with severe behavior problems) have seclusion rooms. Inclusion is not causing the behavior problems and seclusion is not solving them.

Do other special needs kids and faculty need relief from outburst/threats etc? I have no doubt seclusion could be abused or over used, but what do you suggest is the appropriate mechanism if a child is acting in a way that warrants some kind of intervention ?

These rooms have nothing to do with inclusion and are the opposite of inclusion, really. You know what’s cheap and easy? Locking a kid in a room. You know what’s expensive and requires effort & trained professionals and is evidence-based? Detailed behavioral observations and plans based on those behaviors, frequent individual counseling, qualified teachers and aides with enough staffing to follow the students behavioral plans, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d like to see more of this, and certainly more suspensions and expulsions in DCPS. And OOB students who are repeat discipline problems should be sent back to their home schools. Let someone who is willing to buckle down and study hard have a coveted spot in the better school!

You want to see more abusive treatment of disabled children?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d like to see more of this, and certainly more suspensions and expulsions in DCPS. And OOB students who are repeat discipline problems should be sent back to their home schools. Let someone who is willing to buckle down and study hard have a coveted spot in the better school!

You want to see more abusive treatment of disabled children?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child was in a class with a completely out of control child. It was a mess and it very much negatively impacted the learning opportunities for the entire class. The child was frequently removed and taken to a calming down room. We definitely felt like the rest of the class was sacrificed for the sake of inclusion and nobody was happy about it and it was really too much for the school to handle, although they tried mightily. I am a supporter of inclusion but inclusion for inclusion’s sake is not helpful for anyone, nor is it the intent of the IDEA law.

Yeah, well neither is locking SN kids in padded rooms. I don’t know why some posters are making connections between inclusion and seclusion. All the SN schools that DC sends kids with behavior problems to (so non-inclusive, segregated facilities who take kids with severe behavior problems) have seclusion rooms. Inclusion is not causing the behavior problems and seclusion is not solving them.

Do other special needs kids and faculty need relief from outburst/threats etc? I have no doubt seclusion could be abused or over used, but what do you suggest is the appropriate mechanism if a child is acting in a way that warrants some kind of intervention ?

Anonymous wrote:I’d like to see more of this, and certainly more suspensions and expulsions in DCPS. And OOB students who are repeat discipline problems should be sent back to their home schools. Let someone who is willing to buckle down and study hard have a coveted spot in the better school!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child was in a class with a completely out of control child. It was a mess and it very much negatively impacted the learning opportunities for the entire class. The child was frequently removed and taken to a calming down room. We definitely felt like the rest of the class was sacrificed for the sake of inclusion and nobody was happy about it and it was really too much for the school to handle, although they tried mightily. I am a supporter of inclusion but inclusion for inclusion’s sake is not helpful for anyone, nor is it the intent of the IDEA law.

Yeah, well neither is locking SN kids in padded rooms. I don’t know why some posters are making connections between inclusion and seclusion. All the SN schools that DC sends kids with behavior problems to (so non-inclusive, segregated facilities who take kids with severe behavior problems) have seclusion rooms. Inclusion is not causing the behavior problems and seclusion is not solving them.

Anonymous wrote:My child was in a class with a completely out of control child. It was a mess and it very much negatively impacted the learning opportunities for the entire class. The child was frequently removed and taken to a calming down room. We definitely felt like the rest of the class was sacrificed for the sake of inclusion and nobody was happy about it and it was really too much for the school to handle, although they tried mightily. I am a supporter of inclusion but inclusion for inclusion’s sake is not helpful for anyone, nor is it the intent of the IDEA law.