Comments on: Bill to help charters serve high-needs students finds foe in union

By: Danny

Danny — Thu, 21 Jun 2012 13:38:00 +0000

Not sure what 25% analogy you’re referring to.The scores I’m talking about are not analogies; they are reported as differences from a students’ highest classification level in the previous four school years to how they are being approached at the school. They ARE movements as they track an individual child, and charters are, on the whole, better able to move students to more inclusive settings (maybe in your eyes, to the more appropriate LRE defined setting) than they were at previous (mostly district) schools and/or earlier grades while maintaining superior state test performance for that subgroup (see page 18 here: http://bit.ly/state-of-the-sector). Does this control for all aspects of the child’s need, i.e. disability type and so forth? No. This data is not clean and available, but the data we do have does effectively support the fact that charter schools have been on the side of including IEP students in general ed classes more often than district schools.

By: Ellen Mc Hugh

Ellen Mc Hugh — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 21:46:00 +0000

A child with a special needs is evaluated and a program of services is recommended. That program could be a combination of many things: related services,ICT, self contained classes or schools,etc. The LRE, as defined in the law,it the right spot for the child from the get og…not a guess, not a maybe, not a let’s try this or that. One doesn’t move from more to less,one moves on a continuum of services. The DOE’s insistence on using the phrases more and less restrictive are part of the reason the FEDs are all over NYS and NYC on the provision of services and the level of success of students with IEPs in NYC public school system.
Charters are, for the most part, no better or worse than the public schools in working with students with IEPs.
The analogy that 25%of the students in charter schools have moved from one set of services to another (see Danny) is incorrect. What he is implying is that the children need less services. What he is not exploring is the affect of smaller class sizes or the longer school day or the drill learning that may happen in charter schools. The child remains the same, a child with a need, the services are impacted by the type of classroom and the amount of repetition.
As long as the DOE continues to use illogical and poorly constructed paradigms, such as more restrictive to less restrictive, we will be in the unfortunate position of debating a use of a word not the appropriate class or services.
And, not for nothin’ as we say in Brooklyn, what prevents any school, public, charter, parochial etc from creating a 12:1 1 class? And don’t give me the money excuse, just like public schools any school can re-direct it’s budget to serve a need or a student population. Money is not the be all and end all of education, educators are.

By: Danny

Danny — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 17:24:00 +0000

Do you have evidence? It seems that based on the evidence, charter schools have done more to include special education students with their peers. See my comment below.

By: ToddShriver

ToddShriver — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 17:17:00 +0000

NYSUT is right. The Charters are elitist institutions attempting to segregate the population. This bill continues the Charters goal. It should be defeated.

By: Mr. Flerporillo

Mr. Flerporillo — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 15:53:00 +0000

“One truth jumps out at me: special needs students need to be educated with their non-disabled peers.” I don’t know much about special education, but I have noticed that there are differing views on this point, and many believe that not all special needs students need the same thing.

By: Mkmasland

Mkmasland — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 15:34:00 +0000

The pros and cons of the proposed bill are complicated. One truth jumps out at me: special needs students need to be educated with their non-disabled peers. If allowing Charter Schools to provide special education services will allow segregation then this is a terrible idea.

By: Danny

Danny — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 14:02:00 +0000

Looking at the data, charter schools as a whole are far superior in terms of Special Ed Reform/Least Restrictive Environment. In the NYC progress report Least Restrictive Environment measure, despite making up only 3.7% of the scored school population, charter schools make up 27 out of the top 100 at moving students toward Least Restrictive Environment. No, charter schools are good in this area. The point of this legislation is to make it so more charters can include 12:1:1 classes in the menu of services they offer, for the students who do need that end of the spectrum of services.
For thorough data on the charter sector and special ed, see page 27 of the report here: http://www.nyccharterschools.org/data
LRE scores are part of the DOE progress report spreadsheets posted here: http://schools.nyc.gov/Accountability/tools/report/default.htm

By: Pjg320

Pjg320 — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 03:31:00 +0000

The current Special Ed Reform initiative attempts to keep students close to home and to the extent possible place students in inclusive settings, the intent of the bill is to segregate students with disabilities, it is baby public policy, is antithetical to all current research and should be rejected, not because the opposes, it is bad for kids.

By: Lisa Donlan

Lisa Donlan — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 02:22:00 +0000

Wait a minute- now that DoE has mandated that district schools behave like charter schools and rewrite students’ IEPs to offer them the services they have, charters are now adopting the special ed assignment MO of the DoE whereby certain services were offered at some schools and students whose needs matched those services were assigned there.
So “special education is not a place” except, now, in charter schools? huh?

By: Ellen Mc Hugh

Ellen Mc Hugh — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 22:53:00 +0000

I thought charters were serving students with high needs….oops, no, my bad. If they did that the law wouldn’t be necessary, right?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 21:49:00 +0000

This is a bill that would allow charter chains, such as Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academies, to illegally segregate students with special needs in a school which is separate from general education students. I say “illegally” because the law is without question in violation of the clear mandate of federal law that students with special needs be placed in the least restrictive (i.e., most integrated) setting. You can such a bill many things, but how it is a “bill to help charters serve high-needs students” I can’t understand.