San Francisco schools struggle to pay for special ed

In a time of budget crises for schools all over the country, there are ongoing attempts to cut budgets. But should it be done on the backs of severely behaviorally challenged students?

A plan to close a small school for children with severe behavioral problems is mushrooming into a larger battle over how the San Francisco Unified School District treats special-education students.

In recent months, the district signaled that it intended to end its 31-year partnership with the nonprofit Erikson School in the Bayview neighborhood of San Francisco and eventually reassign its 16 students to mainstream programs.

That would be just one of many such moves. Facing a $25 million budget deficit, the district intends to transfer all of its 6,000 special-education students into mainstream programs in the public schools over the next several years. The district spends about $122 million a year on special-education services.

The battle over Erikson, which has received $2.5 million during the last five years while operating rent-free out of buildings owned by the district, illustrates the challenges the district faces as it tries to put the controversial policy in place.

Representatives of at least eight students have taken legal action to prevent the district from placing their children in other schools, according to Shelley Lobell, the school’s founder and its executive director. Erikson administrators argue that district officials based decisions about the school on budget concerns, although a federal law requires districts to put students’ needs above all other priorities.

Read the whole thing.

Federal law trumps local school budget considerations, and indeed there are many who could make the claim that these sort of mandates have led to much of the budgetary crises in the first place. But that's an argument for another post.

And then there's those students' future classmates and teachers. There are alternative programs like these for a reason, and they serve two very important functions. One, they allow the disabled students to get a chance at some sort of education. And, to be brutally blunt, they also allow other students to be educated without worrying if they or their teacher are going to get attacked by students with severe behavior issues. Yes, it is very expensive. But, as San Francisco administrators may be learning, so are lawsuits.

Clarence Thomas: Silence is Golden

Apparently, Justice Clarence Thomas has gone five years without speaking from the bench during oral arguments before the Supreme Court.

I guess if you don't have any questions, you shouldn't ask any.

And yet, five years without opening his mouth during what are called ORAL ARGUMENTS for a good reason. Maybe Associate Justice Thomas doesn't understand this.

Too bad his nut-job wife can't follow his example.

Reciprocity

According to federal law, students have definite privacy rights. However, teachers who work with students are allowed to know information regarding student discipline and behavior. Somehow this second part gets lost a lot among many administrators. I believe that this tendency is extremely counterproductive if not potentially dangerous not just for the teacher involved but for other students.

Case in point: A class was discussing youth law issues, and the school behavior guidelines and district policies regarding the possession of weapons was exhaustively discussed. In the midst of several hypothetical scenarios, a student wanted to know what would happen if, upon coming to school, he realized that he had his weaponry and ammunition from a weekend hunting expedition still within his vehicle upon arriving at school. He (and twenty-two other students in the class) was told that he should approach the school resource officer and immediately let that officer know that weapons had inadvertently been brought to school, and the officer would then secure the weapons so that the student would not potentially face severe consequences for his oversight.

One week later, this same student was caught with weapons upon school property. Oh, and drugs, but that is neither here nor there. His teachers were informed that the young man was suspended but not why.

One week after that, the teacher involved in the discussion was informed about why exactly the young man was suspended. This teacher then informed the assistant principal about the conversation. Here is the assistant principal's response:

"Why didn't you tell me about this earlier?????"

Let's see, because the teacher had no idea why this kid was suspended. Because the AP failed to follow the law. Because the AP treated her staff as if they are not professionals who should be kept informed because she didn't trust them as professionals. Because if teachers reported every single conversation held in class, nothing else would ever get done. Because there is obviously an adversarial situation being created by the AP in regard to her staff, rather than a cooperative one.

Credit the teacher with gently pointing this out.

By the way, this same teacher was berated by another AP for not disclosing that a kid who lives in the teacher's neighborhood who was suspended was thrown a party by her mother in celebration of said suspension.

Until school administration works with the teachers rather than against the teachers, the school will never function well. Administrators need to value teachers as colleagues and acknowledge that teachers spend far more time during the day with the students and have all kinds of knowledge that could be a resource for the administrators in the effective discharge of their duties.

It just requires reciprocity and respect.

Academic freedom in Arizona

An Arizona state senator has introduced a bill in the Arizona legislature to allow college students students to refuse any assignment which they find morally offensive and would require teachers to provide alternatives.

Senate Bill 1331, introduced by Sen. Thayer Verschoor, R-Gilbert, would allow students from universities and community colleges to reject assignments they find objectionable to their religious, moral or sexual beliefs without financial or academic penalty.

The bill passed the Higher Education Committee on Feb. 15. If it passes the Rules Committee and the rest of the Legislature, teachers will have to provide an alternative assignment at a student's request.

"This legislation would impoverish the higher-education system for students," said Barbara Fahey, a professor of English at Scottsdale Community College.

A student complained about an assignment in an English class to read The Ice Storm, which includes scenes of spouse-swapping and other sexual content.

The whole thing started when a student complained that the book was offensive and wanted an alternative assignment. When the teacher refused, the college offered placement in another class. The student refused this and contacted State Senator Verschoor, who then produced the bill. It was pointed out that the syllabus for the course clearly stated that some material could be adjudged objectionable and reminded students that they could drop the class if they so chose.

How long would it take some of MY students to object immediately to every assignment I put before them? And further, who is this student to be able to have such pull with a state senator? I could use his help with a few matters....

Why I love teaching, part 1

No matter how much the detritus of red tape and smug yet ignorant policymakers grates upon me, I love my job.

We were talking about George Fitzhugh's apologies regarding slavery-- in particular, his claim that slaves were the freest people in the world. It kinda reminded me of someone claiming that Katrina refugees actually had gotten a better situation as refugees in Houston than living in their homes in New Orleans slums....

So I decided to go multidisciplinary on them, and asked them if this statement could be interpreted as Orwellian. This of course necessitated that we explore what was meant by Orwellian, so we talked about 1984 and also Animal Farm. I told them that Animal Farm was an allegory, and some didn't know what that meant, either, so I described it, and one of my girls said, "Oh, like Plato's story 'The Cave!'" And she could even talk about what some of the symbolism was! And then a bunch of them wanted to read it too.

Now, I know some will criticize that this discussion had nothing to do with getting the kids ready for the APUSH exam. But I disagree. Learning how to interpret and learning how to make connections ARE what it's all about.

It was cool. And that's why I love teaching, part 1.

Constitution Day

This is a picture of a rock formation I called "The Scream" from my vacation this summer. I have now subtitled it, "Oh No! Another Unfunded Mandate! AAAAIIIIEEEE!!!"

Well, a lot people seem to have their thongs in a twist over Constitution Day. Vanderbilt University apparently assigned the question of whether it was constitutional to force universities to observe Constitution Day (Read about it here and here). Hee Hee! Amusing.

I say, have some irreverent fun with it, since the begininng of the year giddiness has now given way to the occasional pangs of the ol' familiar weltschmerz. Just start off your presentation next year with this:

"Once upon a time, children, there was a man who liked to keep a copy of the Constitution in his shirt pocket, near his heart... right under his white sheet when he was going out to nightride with the Klan, possibly so he could explain to his victims how the Constitution didn't apply to THEM. This man later became a senator, repented his youthful racist ways, but he still likes to force people to do things, like most senators do. So he decided that American schoolchildren were woefully ignorant about the Constitution-- of course that might just be because, due to No Child Left Behind, which this man also sponsored, we spend all our time and money emphasizing writing and mathematics, which are tested, while classes that build citizenship become the red-headed step-children of the school day, because they aren't tested. This senator decided to make the lazy good-for-nothings in America's public schools teach the Constitution on one day each year, since obviously if students don't know something, it's because teachers haven't taught it. And thus was born Constitution Day."

Have fun now.

Privacy rights?

I got some distressing news the other day, and it's only because I badgered it out of a counselor. One of my students has been sitting in my class for over a month, and I was not informed that he hears voices and sees menacing presences who follow him around most of the time. This boy is a wonderful young person who is intelligent and thoughtful, and remarkably in control-- he simply asks to leave the room when he feels overwhelmed and goes to a safe room in the school.

It doesn't matter how I got suspicious-- let's just say I observed a strange episode that made no sense when he was leaving another teacher's classroom.

I am nonplussed, to say the least. Apparently, his guardian does not want his teachers to know, and has insisted that his 504 simply say that he is "depressed."

How is it legal or ethical for this information to be deliberately concealed from me? How is it legal to put a lie on a 504? I have read FERPA. Here's what I found on the Ed dept website, since I began to question myself as to whether I remembered the law correctly.

"Generally, schools must have written permission from the parent or eligible student in order to release any information from a student's education record. However, FERPA allows schools to disclose those records, without consent, to the following parties or under the following conditions (34 CFR § 99.31): School officials with legitimate educational interest;" etc.

Is a teacher who spends an hour or more a day with a student not a school official with a legitimate educational interest? How can I be expected to educate this young man if a condition of this magnitude is considered none of my business? Elsewhere on the Ed dept website, I found this:

"As first enacted, FERPA contained five exceptions to the prior written consent rule for disclosures to...other school officials, including teachers within the educational institution or local educational agency who have legitimate educational interests. The 1974 amendments clarified that the agency or institution determines which school officials have "legitimate educational interests." The 1994 IASA amendments added a requirement that the specific educational interests of the child for whom consent would otherwise be required are included among legitimate educational interests of school officials.

"The 1994 amendments also clarified that nothing in FERPA prohibited an agency or institution from disclosing information about disciplinary actions taken against students to teachers and school officials, including those in other schools, who have legitimate educational interests in the behavior of the student. The No Child Left Behind Act amended the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to require each State to provide an assurance to the Secretary that it has a procedure in place to facilitate the transfer of disciplinary records regarding a student's suspension or expulsion to any elementary or secondary school where the student is enrolled or intends to enroll."

So here's the conclusions to which I have come:
1. The concern for the safety of this student has been sacrificed, since he has been placed with educational professionals throughout the day who have been willfully misled about conditions which definitely can cause him to harm himself or others.
2. The concern for the best and least restrictive education for this student is endangered, since the educational professionals who work with him every day are willfully deceived about his condition.
3. The concern for the safety of other students is not even considered, which is a violation of their rights.
4. The concern for my safety has been abrogated, which is a violation of my rights.
5. Apparently the powers that be in my school (assistant principals, principals, counselors) believe that I and my fellow teachers are not professionals with the best interests and intentions toward our students.
6. These people have decided to willfully misinterpret and misrepresent the law since they feel no obligation nor concern for anyone involved... merely because they fear a legal challenge, probably?

And before you think I am jumping to conclusions, let me emphasize that this is far from the first time I have caught these people at my school engaging in such behaviors as concealing and lying about student discipline and/or diagnoses, whether it involved one of my students or even when it involved a student behaving in a threatening manner toward me personally. I have had referrals not returned to me and referrals "lost" in some amazingly coincidental snafus. I have never been anything but circumspect and above-board in my dealings with the behavior, discipline, and education of my students.

I am grateful that nothing bad happened while I am in the dark. I will continue to teach, guide, and care for this student no matter what.

But some other people are on my list right now.