I was in attendance in my son's IEP meeting on December 16th, 1996. I assumed it was going to a contentious meeting, as it had all of the earmarks of those types I had attended before.
Prior to this meeting, I had written a letter to the principal outlining some of my concerns. After six years of learning the ways of the District, I had become better at covering all of the bases, even though I knew there would be some angle I was not prepared for.
While there were a lot of interesting things that happened in this meeting, I will address one connected to the link below. The principal recorded the meeting. There were a lot of "damaging" things said by some of the District people and also there was a lot of "evidence" of how my "procedural safeguards" were compromised, some being outright violated. Keep in mind this was prior to me learning the rules of the game. In fact, that day started my official quest for knowledge regarding IDEA and how it is supposed to work.
It was the proverbial straw. Some of the people who were in that meeting are still around. I think one or two of them understood the injustice that was done. I think the others were more entrenched in how to spin the events so they were defensible.
The fallout of this meeting was immediate and widespread. It may not surprise some of you that despite the fact that I had an MO-12 inviting me to an IEP meeting on that day and a time specific and room specific, along with the fact that nine or ten other people showed up at the same time and place, upon my request for copies of the records of that IEP meeting, I was told by a District Person that there had been no IEP meeting. I guess it depends on what the definition of "was" was.
The principal had tape recorded the meeting. She had prepared for taping. I did not. Try getting a definitive "yes" or "no" answer today whether a parent can tape an IEP meeting.
Back to my point that speaks to the below. After I insisted on getting a copy of that tape, I was finally given a tape.
The tape I received was blank.
This post jogged my memory:
Saturday, April 05, 2008
I can't remember exactly how this poor mangled teacher came to my attention. I think she emailed me. I asked for a copy of her court case to put on our blog, and she said OK.
Showing posts with label ethics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ethics. Show all posts
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Monday, March 24, 2008
Elephants Have Good Memories
I have a comment to make about a comment to me:
Nobody's Patsy said...
Hey Pro--
"It's all about the documentation. If it isn't on paper, then it never happened. The best things people like you and myself (and countless others) is to teach our breatheren who, how, when, and why to document. We are all highly educated folks, we of all people should know about the power of the pen. I am availble for lessons if need be.
March 23, 2008 10:18 PM" and can be found here
I have started the process of labeling my previous posts. I am now more and more seeing issues and ideas coming up that I have given an opinion or comment on from my position. I can't find my comments very easily, so maybe if I have a label system, it will help me find the links faster.
I know full well about the importance of a paper trail. Of equal importance is whether the trail is present or not present. Somewhere I wrote about how much power the entity has that controls the paper trail. Fabrication, fraudulent change and missing documentation is all part of the game. Somewhere I wrote about how important it is to make copies and make sure someone else has a copy, and everyone knows that someone else has that copy. It is called insurance.
Below is what I wrote about my perception of district documentation. The full context can be found here: Big Fat Money
"I have been in many, many IEP meetings. I know the game. If an elephant came into the IEP meeting, dropped a load right in the middle of the table, no one could ever prove it if it wasn't written in the IEP form or the conference notes. Even when there are teachers, ESE specialists, related service personnel, principals, directors and parents that see the elephant, moved their papers out of the way of the big dump, and smelled the aroma that stunk up the whole room. If it wasn't written, it didn't happen."
S""t happens all of the time, and with elephants in the room, it's a load.
Nobody's Patsy said...
Hey Pro--
"It's all about the documentation. If it isn't on paper, then it never happened. The best things people like you and myself (and countless others) is to teach our breatheren who, how, when, and why to document. We are all highly educated folks, we of all people should know about the power of the pen. I am availble for lessons if need be.
March 23, 2008 10:18 PM" and can be found here
I have started the process of labeling my previous posts. I am now more and more seeing issues and ideas coming up that I have given an opinion or comment on from my position. I can't find my comments very easily, so maybe if I have a label system, it will help me find the links faster.
I know full well about the importance of a paper trail. Of equal importance is whether the trail is present or not present. Somewhere I wrote about how much power the entity has that controls the paper trail. Fabrication, fraudulent change and missing documentation is all part of the game. Somewhere I wrote about how important it is to make copies and make sure someone else has a copy, and everyone knows that someone else has that copy. It is called insurance.
Below is what I wrote about my perception of district documentation. The full context can be found here: Big Fat Money
"I have been in many, many IEP meetings. I know the game. If an elephant came into the IEP meeting, dropped a load right in the middle of the table, no one could ever prove it if it wasn't written in the IEP form or the conference notes. Even when there are teachers, ESE specialists, related service personnel, principals, directors and parents that see the elephant, moved their papers out of the way of the big dump, and smelled the aroma that stunk up the whole room. If it wasn't written, it didn't happen."
S""t happens all of the time, and with elephants in the room, it's a load.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Now We Get To See Why Kids And Parents And Public Education Lose
Public Education is nothing if it isn't about big money. Bottom line.
Defending this money is a paramount goal. Statistically, the public systems protect each other. They have unlimited resources and expertise in strategies. What seems to never be of concern is that there is more to life than money. But at a $200,000 liability cap for public school systems, that is as insignifant as hiring a consultant.
I write frequently about the abuse of power by public school employees. They are afforded protections that most people don't get.
In this case, the charges against a teacher seem to fit with the physical signs of the kids. Goose egg lumps, busted lips, extracted teeth, and bruises are hard to fabricate.
I am not surprised in the least at how the defense is shaping up. It is the nature of the defense culture for public schools.
Another story is here :
Click here: HeraldTribune.com - News - News stories about Sarasota, Manatee and Charlotte counties in Florida, from the newspa
We have a time line:
"Two aides in Diana O'Neill's class started documenting instances in which they believed she abused students as early as October 2007. But it was three months later -- after more than a dozen instances -- before the police and the state Department of Children and Families were notified"
Some one had concerns, but if it isn't on paper, it didn't happen: "Police records also indicate that O'Neill, 45, had been "talked to" in the past for her behavior with her profoundly disabled students. But there is no record that any concerns were ever reported to the police or the school district to investigate."
We have a kid who has no chance of telling the truth so how could anyone believe anything about her wasn't done by herself:
"Tara, who cannot walk, talk or see, has been in O'Neill's class for eight years.
During that time she often came home with bruises, prompting Hatfield to go to the school and question the teacher. Every time, O'Neill had a different explanation that ranged from other children hitting her to her falling out of her wheelchair, Hatfield said."
A few details by the aides:
"Police identified four of O'Neill's five students as victims. With one child, aides reported that O'Neill parked his wheelchair against a wall and watched as the boy hit his head against it, sarcastically telling him, "Don't hit your head."
Aides also reported that O'Neill had kicked one girl in the legs, hit her in the head with objects, pushed her to the floor and used a "weighted blanket" and a "body sock" -- two therapy tools that restrict movement -- to punish her."
Setting up the need for understanding a unique situation:
"Educators and parents alike complain of little support from the rest of the school system, and even fewer resources. It is a pressure cooker that can pit teachers against parents, or unify them in the face of shared challenges.
Despite efforts to include students with disabilities in the regular school setting, at most schools these small classes stay clustered together, sharing resources and working as teams, creating a tight-knit community.
It is also a place where teachers employ unusual techniques to control their children's behavior and help them develop physically and mentally."
And then we have common place actions:
"For example, the aides reported an episode where O'Neill shoved a cloth into a child's mouth and then pulled it out so hard the child's tooth came out.
But Sloan said this is a common technique used to build the biting reflexes of students with disabilities. In this case, O'Neill accidentally knocked out a baby tooth, Sloan said."
And I wrote previously about how the system will make sure no one speaks out without themselves becoming liable:
"School Superintendent Gary Norris said the district would review not only the allegations against O'Neill, but also how the other employees responded."
And here comes the "defense of professionals":
"These charges were observed by aides who are not sufficiently trained to work with handicapped children," Sloan said. "This woman is completely professional.""
There is the "culture of defense" in a nutshell.
If these aides are lying, our kids will suffer yet another setback.
If these aides can not prove they are telling the truth, our kids will suffer another setback.
Afterall, it is about numbers. The fact that this is an isolated incident eases our anxiety.
Unless it was your kid.
But in that case, you would just be a parent.
Defending this money is a paramount goal. Statistically, the public systems protect each other. They have unlimited resources and expertise in strategies. What seems to never be of concern is that there is more to life than money. But at a $200,000 liability cap for public school systems, that is as insignifant as hiring a consultant.
I write frequently about the abuse of power by public school employees. They are afforded protections that most people don't get.
In this case, the charges against a teacher seem to fit with the physical signs of the kids. Goose egg lumps, busted lips, extracted teeth, and bruises are hard to fabricate.
I am not surprised in the least at how the defense is shaping up. It is the nature of the defense culture for public schools.
Another story is here :
Click here: HeraldTribune.com - News - News stories about Sarasota, Manatee and Charlotte counties in Florida, from the newspa
We have a time line:
"Two aides in Diana O'Neill's class started documenting instances in which they believed she abused students as early as October 2007. But it was three months later -- after more than a dozen instances -- before the police and the state Department of Children and Families were notified"
Some one had concerns, but if it isn't on paper, it didn't happen: "Police records also indicate that O'Neill, 45, had been "talked to" in the past for her behavior with her profoundly disabled students. But there is no record that any concerns were ever reported to the police or the school district to investigate."
We have a kid who has no chance of telling the truth so how could anyone believe anything about her wasn't done by herself:
"Tara, who cannot walk, talk or see, has been in O'Neill's class for eight years.
During that time she often came home with bruises, prompting Hatfield to go to the school and question the teacher. Every time, O'Neill had a different explanation that ranged from other children hitting her to her falling out of her wheelchair, Hatfield said."
A few details by the aides:
"Police identified four of O'Neill's five students as victims. With one child, aides reported that O'Neill parked his wheelchair against a wall and watched as the boy hit his head against it, sarcastically telling him, "Don't hit your head."
Aides also reported that O'Neill had kicked one girl in the legs, hit her in the head with objects, pushed her to the floor and used a "weighted blanket" and a "body sock" -- two therapy tools that restrict movement -- to punish her."
Setting up the need for understanding a unique situation:
"Educators and parents alike complain of little support from the rest of the school system, and even fewer resources. It is a pressure cooker that can pit teachers against parents, or unify them in the face of shared challenges.
Despite efforts to include students with disabilities in the regular school setting, at most schools these small classes stay clustered together, sharing resources and working as teams, creating a tight-knit community.
It is also a place where teachers employ unusual techniques to control their children's behavior and help them develop physically and mentally."
And then we have common place actions:
"For example, the aides reported an episode where O'Neill shoved a cloth into a child's mouth and then pulled it out so hard the child's tooth came out.
But Sloan said this is a common technique used to build the biting reflexes of students with disabilities. In this case, O'Neill accidentally knocked out a baby tooth, Sloan said."
And I wrote previously about how the system will make sure no one speaks out without themselves becoming liable:
"School Superintendent Gary Norris said the district would review not only the allegations against O'Neill, but also how the other employees responded."
And here comes the "defense of professionals":
"These charges were observed by aides who are not sufficiently trained to work with handicapped children," Sloan said. "This woman is completely professional.""
There is the "culture of defense" in a nutshell.
If these aides are lying, our kids will suffer yet another setback.
If these aides can not prove they are telling the truth, our kids will suffer another setback.
Afterall, it is about numbers. The fact that this is an isolated incident eases our anxiety.
Unless it was your kid.
But in that case, you would just be a parent.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Maybe It's Just Me
While my local school system is in the public throes of who is really running the show, I get stuck on the meaning of words.
Now that freedom of speech issues have finally reached the point that the HCDS police are called to action, I wonder where has everyone been all of these years.
I will always vividly recall the day at Mann Middle School when I was told by the principal that if I came on campus without checking in to her office first, I would be charged with trespassing.
The fact that I was making a big squawk about my repeated attempts to address issues with my son’s education and the fact that this threat came the day after I wrote a complaint letter gave me reason to believe that the 3 months of previous same actions on my part were now under a different line of scrutiny.
At least I didn’t have the security called on me. Instead, I called the Director of ESE while sitting in the office. I had the number saved because I used it a lot over the years. This may have saved my immediate arrest. It was a gutsy move on my part, because Directors have as much say over what a principal does or does not do as I did. But there is something to say about safety in numbers, and how many people know.
I was not accustom to this type of treatment, or rather, the treatment was getting worse. I did not think the setting was safe for my son. So when I said I was keeping him home until we could have another of those countless meanings, the veiled threat of truancy was thrown out. Knowing the absolute power of the school District, I made sure I obtained a Dr's excuse to protect me.
As the days and weeks played out, since I had become learned in the ways of paper warfare, my documentation along with proof that “they” had changed theirs, probably saved me from the usual bulldozed flattening that most parents end up with.
Taking on the system means that you must have documentation and make sure some one else has a copy of it too.
Yesterday I posted the link to some probable cause affidavits.
One of the sentences struck me as odd, so I revisited it today. On page two, it says that the teacher’s strikes (to the kid who was an “equivalent 11 to 14 month old reference motor skills”) “were often prompted by an incorrect answer to a question, not any disciplinary problem or wrong doing. In that sense, there was no legal justification for her to strike the child.”
And then on page 3, we find: the teacher’s statement of “you gonna kick me, I’m gonna kick you (pg 2),” “implies revenge as a motive and a desire to hurt of cause pain to … rather than any educational purpose.”
I am thankful that the writer was able to determine that there was no educational purpose for the actions the teacher took upon the kid. It must have been a tough legal decision to write that out.
Now that freedom of speech issues have finally reached the point that the HCDS police are called to action, I wonder where has everyone been all of these years.
I will always vividly recall the day at Mann Middle School when I was told by the principal that if I came on campus without checking in to her office first, I would be charged with trespassing.
The fact that I was making a big squawk about my repeated attempts to address issues with my son’s education and the fact that this threat came the day after I wrote a complaint letter gave me reason to believe that the 3 months of previous same actions on my part were now under a different line of scrutiny.
At least I didn’t have the security called on me. Instead, I called the Director of ESE while sitting in the office. I had the number saved because I used it a lot over the years. This may have saved my immediate arrest. It was a gutsy move on my part, because Directors have as much say over what a principal does or does not do as I did. But there is something to say about safety in numbers, and how many people know.
I was not accustom to this type of treatment, or rather, the treatment was getting worse. I did not think the setting was safe for my son. So when I said I was keeping him home until we could have another of those countless meanings, the veiled threat of truancy was thrown out. Knowing the absolute power of the school District, I made sure I obtained a Dr's excuse to protect me.
As the days and weeks played out, since I had become learned in the ways of paper warfare, my documentation along with proof that “they” had changed theirs, probably saved me from the usual bulldozed flattening that most parents end up with.
Taking on the system means that you must have documentation and make sure some one else has a copy of it too.
Yesterday I posted the link to some probable cause affidavits.
One of the sentences struck me as odd, so I revisited it today. On page two, it says that the teacher’s strikes (to the kid who was an “equivalent 11 to 14 month old reference motor skills”) “were often prompted by an incorrect answer to a question, not any disciplinary problem or wrong doing. In that sense, there was no legal justification for her to strike the child.”
And then on page 3, we find: the teacher’s statement of “you gonna kick me, I’m gonna kick you (pg 2),” “implies revenge as a motive and a desire to hurt of cause pain to … rather than any educational purpose.”
I am thankful that the writer was able to determine that there was no educational purpose for the actions the teacher took upon the kid. It must have been a tough legal decision to write that out.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Thankfully the Aides finally got the courage
This is not a broad brush attack against teachers.
I will readily agree that this (teacher) is an isolated incident. Obviously, her patterns of behavior towards the kids were not isolated. There was enough of them that some how it overcame what ever barriers the aides had in reporting these events.
I know a lot of people don't believe parents. The principal makes a comment that she doesn't think the aides would make this up. But she likes the teacher and is surprised these events happened. Like being slammed on the head for not answering a question. It's in the reports.
It reminds be of a kid at Randall Middle school who was given 7 felony assualt charges against a school employee. Part of the reason his behavior escalated was he refused to obey an order to stand up. The fact that he had a disabilty to the extent he could not stand up without assistance of some type didn't seem to have much meaning to the authority figures. I never could understand the mindset of an adult who puts themselves in striking range of a kid who can not stand up, other than to prove the adult was the boss.
Sort of that arrogance with ignorance thing. The charges were later dropped, which probably really pissed the teacher off. Upsurped the teacher's authority over noncompliant kids. Tons of CYA paperwork were generated.
On page 16 of the attached link, it states that one parent said there were no other options for her child. I know what it is like to not be heard.
And it didn't happen in my county, so why should I even bring it up.
But I just couldn't help reading the probable cause affidavits
I wonder what the culture of defense is in that county.
I wonder what message the aides will get.
I wonder if they will get accolades for defending the disabled.
I wonder if they will be used as a example that the next time an employee sees something like this, whatever you do, you do not expose the school system.
My comments are not about teachers. My comments are about systems.
I will readily agree that this (teacher) is an isolated incident. Obviously, her patterns of behavior towards the kids were not isolated. There was enough of them that some how it overcame what ever barriers the aides had in reporting these events.
I know a lot of people don't believe parents. The principal makes a comment that she doesn't think the aides would make this up. But she likes the teacher and is surprised these events happened. Like being slammed on the head for not answering a question. It's in the reports.
It reminds be of a kid at Randall Middle school who was given 7 felony assualt charges against a school employee. Part of the reason his behavior escalated was he refused to obey an order to stand up. The fact that he had a disabilty to the extent he could not stand up without assistance of some type didn't seem to have much meaning to the authority figures. I never could understand the mindset of an adult who puts themselves in striking range of a kid who can not stand up, other than to prove the adult was the boss.
Sort of that arrogance with ignorance thing. The charges were later dropped, which probably really pissed the teacher off. Upsurped the teacher's authority over noncompliant kids. Tons of CYA paperwork were generated.
On page 16 of the attached link, it states that one parent said there were no other options for her child. I know what it is like to not be heard.
And it didn't happen in my county, so why should I even bring it up.
But I just couldn't help reading the probable cause affidavits
I wonder what the culture of defense is in that county.
I wonder what message the aides will get.
I wonder if they will get accolades for defending the disabled.
I wonder if they will be used as a example that the next time an employee sees something like this, whatever you do, you do not expose the school system.
My comments are not about teachers. My comments are about systems.
Saturday, December 29, 2007
Image More Important Than Substance?
This article may hold information that is common to our public school education systems. For those who believe that the main goal of the system is to maintain an image of competence at the cost of achieving competence, this article fits the template.
Two teachers with apparent laudable backgrounds appear to be trying to improve their system. It appears they have the necessary experience to comprehend what changes were needed that would be beneficial.
For their efforts, they are banned.
"Traube said the district isn’t interested in public constructive criticism.
“I think its obvious what they want is a very cooperative relationship between anyone representing teachers,” he said. “They don’t want anyone to be adversarial in this district”.
"Chester, who is retired from a career in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has taught for seven years. Last year, children at one of the schools she was banned from nominated her for teacher of the year, she said. She also volunteered to start a penmanship club at one of the schools."
"Teaching is what she loves, Chester said. But, she said, “I would like the cloud of fear that people who work for this district are under to go away.”"
This is not the first time I have heard of a "cloud of fear" within a public school system.
Banned substitutes still speaking out against school district : Lee County : Naples Daily News
Two teachers with apparent laudable backgrounds appear to be trying to improve their system. It appears they have the necessary experience to comprehend what changes were needed that would be beneficial.
For their efforts, they are banned.
"Traube said the district isn’t interested in public constructive criticism.
“I think its obvious what they want is a very cooperative relationship between anyone representing teachers,” he said. “They don’t want anyone to be adversarial in this district”.
"Chester, who is retired from a career in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has taught for seven years. Last year, children at one of the schools she was banned from nominated her for teacher of the year, she said. She also volunteered to start a penmanship club at one of the schools."
"Teaching is what she loves, Chester said. But, she said, “I would like the cloud of fear that people who work for this district are under to go away.”"
This is not the first time I have heard of a "cloud of fear" within a public school system.
Banned substitutes still speaking out against school district : Lee County : Naples Daily News
Thursday, November 22, 2007
This Dot may be Huge if it is truly connected
While reading a story that appeared to be about the misstep of a Band Director, Texting Puts Teacher In Bind , I also read the comments.
If one reads this and follows the connections, it says a lot. First there is an allegation about a band director's ex-wife had an affair with the husband of a school board member who was having an affair with an administrator.
A more direct comment about the story is that apparently the "complaining parent" against the Band Director is also a "teacher". And the teacher/parent wants something.
This is just too much if it is true. Education just has to take a back seat to this story. And to think that decisions are made in the best interest of our children and our teachers.
This one stands out like a Dot of a solar ray:
Posted by ( cshultz110 ) on November 22, 2007 at 1:06 p.m. ( Suggest removal )
luvpercussion
You are completely correct! God forbid the truth come out. It is all politics, just ask Jenifer Felairo and Mark Hart (Opps, I forgot that affair was covered up . . . I am sooo sorry!) he, he Amazing how he just "left".
Folks, I have been in this district for 11 years and know for a fact that it IS a good ole' boys system. Lots of corruption and politics. To give you an idea (and yes, this is first hand knowledge), I was a band director and took a leave of absence last year after my now ex-wife had an affair with a promonent school board members now ex-husband. (Yes, they were both cheating on each other. See previously mentioned) After getting my act back together and returning from my leave, I was shocked to find that no principal would hire me. Not because of my performance, but because nobody wanted to touch the situation since it delt directly with a school board member and the politics it would involve. That is our school board folks!!! I can't wait for Mr. S to be obsolved of this accusations. Shame on the parent who is a teacher trying to play the system to get what they want. That should be the real headline: "How a teacher uses politics to ruin anothers career and how the school board helps them to do it."
If one reads this and follows the connections, it says a lot. First there is an allegation about a band director's ex-wife had an affair with the husband of a school board member who was having an affair with an administrator.
A more direct comment about the story is that apparently the "complaining parent" against the Band Director is also a "teacher". And the teacher/parent wants something.
This is just too much if it is true. Education just has to take a back seat to this story. And to think that decisions are made in the best interest of our children and our teachers.
This one stands out like a Dot of a solar ray:
Posted by ( cshultz110 ) on November 22, 2007 at 1:06 p.m. ( Suggest removal )
luvpercussion
You are completely correct! God forbid the truth come out. It is all politics, just ask Jenifer Felairo and Mark Hart (Opps, I forgot that affair was covered up . . . I am sooo sorry!) he, he Amazing how he just "left".
Folks, I have been in this district for 11 years and know for a fact that it IS a good ole' boys system. Lots of corruption and politics. To give you an idea (and yes, this is first hand knowledge), I was a band director and took a leave of absence last year after my now ex-wife had an affair with a promonent school board members now ex-husband. (Yes, they were both cheating on each other. See previously mentioned) After getting my act back together and returning from my leave, I was shocked to find that no principal would hire me. Not because of my performance, but because nobody wanted to touch the situation since it delt directly with a school board member and the politics it would involve. That is our school board folks!!! I can't wait for Mr. S to be obsolved of this accusations. Shame on the parent who is a teacher trying to play the system to get what they want. That should be the real headline: "How a teacher uses politics to ruin anothers career and how the school board helps them to do it."
Friday, November 9, 2007
My read-everyday blogger is emphatic about "EDUCATING YOUNG STUDENTS IS NOT A BUSINESS!"
We share an angst about our public education system. We view it from different perspectives.
I am particularly impressed by this post: Courage Needs Fear by Definition
There are two points that, when put together, I have a question about.
"It is appropriate to describe what goes on at an individual school if it is relevant to the public (taxpayers). It should not concern the taxpayer which school one is describing in particular, but only that a problem exists that needs to be addressed. Those involved know what school is having which problem."
"We must have reasonable faith that those in administration we disagree with are acting according to their best beliefs of how things should be."
I have watched many Board meetings and had years of experience in both describing individual issues and grappling with trying to have reasonable faith in administrators.
Through blogging and other on-line media, I now see evidence of teachers who are trying to expose problems that effect their ability to perform their job as educators. I see teachers using research based articles and references to support their positions.
We share an angst about our public education system. We view it from different perspectives.
I am particularly impressed by this post: Courage Needs Fear by Definition
There are two points that, when put together, I have a question about.
"It is appropriate to describe what goes on at an individual school if it is relevant to the public (taxpayers). It should not concern the taxpayer which school one is describing in particular, but only that a problem exists that needs to be addressed. Those involved know what school is having which problem."
"We must have reasonable faith that those in administration we disagree with are acting according to their best beliefs of how things should be."
I have watched many Board meetings and had years of experience in both describing individual issues and grappling with trying to have reasonable faith in administrators.
Through blogging and other on-line media, I now see evidence of teachers who are trying to expose problems that effect their ability to perform their job as educators. I see teachers using research based articles and references to support their positions.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
If it was about religion, race or sexual orientation, there would be tolerance
"Marsha Alcorn, the district's 504 coordinator, says most parents with allergic children don't need the 504 plan.
"We do a health care plan in the schools with the school nurse," she says. "I think the parents feel there is more teeth [in the 504], but they should be getting all they need already."
See article :'A Peanut In The Classroom Is Like A Loaded Gun'
I am not surprised to hear this scenario in Hillsborough County. I am also familiar with the standard response of "isolated incident".
Research the year plus difficulties a parent had that led to a 504 complaint that resulted in the HCDS policy on juvenile diabetes (1997). This was a classic case of ignorance and refusal to accept medical information(over a year) exacerbated by a system entrenched in need to maintain power to back up the teacher’s actions.
This is also not a "broad brush attack".
I believe the problems lie where there is lack of understanding of the law and professional responsibilities infused with a cavalier attitude for some District personnel to maintain power. This abuse of power takes many forms, usually by backing a decision that was ill founded. The District appears to be reticent to openly correct a misguided administrative decision. I often wonder if switching student placement or promoting personnel is the preferred face-saving action.
I am aware that there are many professionals in HCDS that do a great job, work hard and are dedicated to the welfare of their students. In fact, the unprofessional actions of others play a big part of making your job more difficult.
Ask yourself how long these and other reported problems go on before they rose to a degree of exposure and forced accountability. Accountability is the issue. Parsing over health care plans or 504 plans and are they written or not is the smoke screen.
Read for yourself. Go to wrightslaw.com - bottom left link - Section 504
"We do a health care plan in the schools with the school nurse," she says. "I think the parents feel there is more teeth [in the 504], but they should be getting all they need already."
See article :'A Peanut In The Classroom Is Like A Loaded Gun'
I am not surprised to hear this scenario in Hillsborough County. I am also familiar with the standard response of "isolated incident".
Research the year plus difficulties a parent had that led to a 504 complaint that resulted in the HCDS policy on juvenile diabetes (1997). This was a classic case of ignorance and refusal to accept medical information(over a year) exacerbated by a system entrenched in need to maintain power to back up the teacher’s actions.
This is also not a "broad brush attack".
I believe the problems lie where there is lack of understanding of the law and professional responsibilities infused with a cavalier attitude for some District personnel to maintain power. This abuse of power takes many forms, usually by backing a decision that was ill founded. The District appears to be reticent to openly correct a misguided administrative decision. I often wonder if switching student placement or promoting personnel is the preferred face-saving action.
I am aware that there are many professionals in HCDS that do a great job, work hard and are dedicated to the welfare of their students. In fact, the unprofessional actions of others play a big part of making your job more difficult.
Ask yourself how long these and other reported problems go on before they rose to a degree of exposure and forced accountability. Accountability is the issue. Parsing over health care plans or 504 plans and are they written or not is the smoke screen.
Read for yourself. Go to wrightslaw.com - bottom left link - Section 504
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Milwaukee Public Schools loses special ed lawsuit - Coming to a District near you soon?
Milwaukee Public Schools loses special ed lawsuit.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=660882
See below how the judge answered this one: "lawyers hired by the school district had argued that much of the testimony from the parents was not reliable"
Systemic delay in HCDS was addressed a few years ago. The District has, to the last of my knowledge, a written policy that requires initial evaluations to be initiated within 30 days of parent's signed consent and completed within 60 days of same consent.
Unless the parent knows that the signed consent is the only thing that triggers this timeline (possibly a false premise under Section 504), verbal assurances that the issues will be adressed only delay the timeline. Suspending kids whose behavior is dramatically different from his/her peers (usually a sign that it may be a manifestation of their disability) without the District acknowledging or evaluating the kid for a suspected disability certainly saves money.
Suspending kids sets the stage of "First we blame the kid, then we blame the parent". It absolves the District from providing resources needed to address the manifested behaviors. While the parent is repeatedly assured that the District personnel are trained professionals, the District personnel's ignorance of understanding the concept of "special education" is on full display. This is prevalent with site administrators who have no concept of special ed.
What is the cost to saving money?
<<<<<<<<<"The inability of MPS to reach full compliance with the law in the area of Child Find is not the result of numerous isolated and unrelated cases, but stems from systemic inadequacies," Goodstein wrote. MPS said two years ago that it had spent $1.8 million on its defense, some of which it could possibly recoup through insurance. That was before the three-week-long trial in 2006. Spitzer-Resnick said his group has spent more than $1 million, money it hopes MPS and DPI will now be forced to pay. During the 2006 trial in front of Goodstein, lawyers hired by the school district had argued that much of the testimony from the parents was not reliable. But Goodstein cited specific cases presented at the trial where he judged the district had not addressed students' needs appropriately. Spitzer-Resnick said that throughout the legal proceedings: "We've heard 'It's poverty, it's mobility, it's homelessness.' Guess what? Those excuses are not given any credence by the court or by the law." One of the mothers involved in the lawsuit, whose son's story was chronicled in a December 2005 Journal Sentinel article, said she made repeated requests that her son be tested for learning disabilities. Eventually, the boy was 12 years old but still in the third grade at MPS. He was suspended so often that his mother and teachers sometimes lost track of where he was supposed to be. In another case, one girl cut herself at school and once wrote on her desk: "Kill all people. Solve the problem." While she did well on standardized tests, she couldn't seem to pass the sixth grade. The judge noted that school officials suspended the girl and referred her to a new school - but did not evaluate her for special education until prodded to. "The issue of suspension has an effect on the timely identification of children in need of special education," the judge wrote. "It also had an effect on the timeliness of providing services.">>>>>>>>
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=660882
See below how the judge answered this one: "lawyers hired by the school district had argued that much of the testimony from the parents was not reliable"
Systemic delay in HCDS was addressed a few years ago. The District has, to the last of my knowledge, a written policy that requires initial evaluations to be initiated within 30 days of parent's signed consent and completed within 60 days of same consent.
Unless the parent knows that the signed consent is the only thing that triggers this timeline (possibly a false premise under Section 504), verbal assurances that the issues will be adressed only delay the timeline. Suspending kids whose behavior is dramatically different from his/her peers (usually a sign that it may be a manifestation of their disability) without the District acknowledging or evaluating the kid for a suspected disability certainly saves money.
Suspending kids sets the stage of "First we blame the kid, then we blame the parent". It absolves the District from providing resources needed to address the manifested behaviors. While the parent is repeatedly assured that the District personnel are trained professionals, the District personnel's ignorance of understanding the concept of "special education" is on full display. This is prevalent with site administrators who have no concept of special ed.
What is the cost to saving money?
<<<<<<<<<"The inability of MPS to reach full compliance with the law in the area of Child Find is not the result of numerous isolated and unrelated cases, but stems from systemic inadequacies," Goodstein wrote. MPS said two years ago that it had spent $1.8 million on its defense, some of which it could possibly recoup through insurance. That was before the three-week-long trial in 2006. Spitzer-Resnick said his group has spent more than $1 million, money it hopes MPS and DPI will now be forced to pay. During the 2006 trial in front of Goodstein, lawyers hired by the school district had argued that much of the testimony from the parents was not reliable. But Goodstein cited specific cases presented at the trial where he judged the district had not addressed students' needs appropriately. Spitzer-Resnick said that throughout the legal proceedings: "We've heard 'It's poverty, it's mobility, it's homelessness.' Guess what? Those excuses are not given any credence by the court or by the law." One of the mothers involved in the lawsuit, whose son's story was chronicled in a December 2005 Journal Sentinel article, said she made repeated requests that her son be tested for learning disabilities. Eventually, the boy was 12 years old but still in the third grade at MPS. He was suspended so often that his mother and teachers sometimes lost track of where he was supposed to be. In another case, one girl cut herself at school and once wrote on her desk: "Kill all people. Solve the problem." While she did well on standardized tests, she couldn't seem to pass the sixth grade. The judge noted that school officials suspended the girl and referred her to a new school - but did not evaluate her for special education until prodded to. "The issue of suspension has an effect on the timely identification of children in need of special education," the judge wrote. "It also had an effect on the timeliness of providing services.">>>>>>>>
Saturday, September 15, 2007
"We have known for a long time (decades!) about what constitutes effective staff development. As the latest version of the National Staff Development Council Standards for Staff Development notes, effective staff development has small groups of educators working together over time in professional learning communities; is based on principles of effective adult learning; and
deepens educators’ content knowledge.
Yet what does staff development look like in most school districts? Typically it involves three or four one-shot “sit and get” (or “spray and pray”) sessions spread across the year, each on a different topic than the one before, that are attended by most or all educators in the organization. A “one size fits all” model is used, meaning that there is relatively little differentiation between, say, music teachers and math teachers and industrial arts teachers. Sometimes schools spice it up a bit and have a buffet day where educators can pick from multiple choices throughout the day, much like a professional conference."
deepens educators’ content knowledge.
Yet what does staff development look like in most school districts? Typically it involves three or four one-shot “sit and get” (or “spray and pray”) sessions spread across the year, each on a different topic than the one before, that are attended by most or all educators in the organization. A “one size fits all” model is used, meaning that there is relatively little differentiation between, say, music teachers and math teachers and industrial arts teachers. Sometimes schools spice it up a bit and have a buffet day where educators can pick from multiple choices throughout the day, much like a professional conference."
and from the comment section, I chose this:
"The one area that has frustrated me as a consultant is that there is little to no funding to provide executive coaching services to principals. If a principal needs help, they often can't speak up or they are admitting weakness"
I posted the above to say this:
As those who should know, transition plans (school to post school) can start as early as the age of 14. I was aware that the common practice in HCDS was to wait until the last two years of the student's stay, and that out of these last two years, "work training" was usually no more than half a year per year out of the last two. One could understand the difficulties that arose when I insisted on my son obtaining work experience starting at the age of 15.
While there is so much information that should be provided leading up to the following point, suffice it to say that my son became involved in a "pilot program" in HCDS. He was one of three students in the program. The District paid money for an outside consultant to demonstrate how to set up "school to work" situations for even the most "challanged" students. I thought it was a great program and it provided support and guidance to my son's team.
The program consisted of 3 teams for each of the students. My understanding was that the information and strategies of the "pilot program", once developed, would be shared to others and become integrated within the system. In one of the early meetings one of the teachers of one of the teams said" Why am I here? I have a bunch of student's in my class room that need me - I don't have time for this."
I am sure it baffles the administrators that know how much my son received from HCDS to hear me be critical about the system. My previous post under "A Piece of the Dysfunctional Puzzle" speaks to the difficulty of challanging a mindset as opposed to challanging what is perceived as an isolated incident. An illustration of this may be revealed by a comment another teacher made to me one day. She said to me "it is unfair that your son get's more than the other students in the class."
I recently heard that the "pilot program" and the systems that were in place at the school my son was at the time are no longer there. As far as I can tell, the key players of the program are gone from the school. Some have "moved up the ladder" and some transferred out.
I can only assume that when the next parent comes along that insists on following the rules, another "pilot program" will be invested in.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Sacred Cows and Unwritten SP&P's.
There are some things that happen in one’s life that one wants to forget. There are some things that happen in one’s life that one should forget and move on. The recent events revolving around the actions and comments of the HCDS’ Board has jostled my memory about past events that I would like to forget.
Blogging affords me the opportunity to present past events in a manner that gives some substance to why I have done the things I have done. One must read my adjacent blog as well. What those who read about me should understand that my cause is not about me, it is about the ethical people within the system, the parents and the students. I have repeatedly seen good hard working people doing the “right thing” be subverted by a system and the people who carry out the system’s desires.
Many pieces of the dysfunctional puzzle are shaped as unwritten SP&Ps within the realm of Special Education. When one has their finger on the pulse of the District, it is not difficult to recognize these unwritten SP&P’s. One of these unwritten policies was brought out as a finding in the Whitehead vs. HCDS case. The allegation was that the District had an unwritten policy to not write individual speech therapy into an IEP as a related service. My understanding is someone, who apparently did not know this unwritten policy, first wrote individual speech therapy into the IEP. Another IEP was convened soon after that to discuss something else, and when the IEP was updated, the individual speech therapy was removed from the new IEP, without discussion.
"66. Respondent violated the procedural requirements relating to the formulation and implementation of Andrew W.’s IEP by the following actions:
(a) Implementing a policy of omitting from IEPs specific speech/language services that will be provided to an individual, irrespective of the individual’s needs for specific speech/language services. '
One interested in learning the mechanisms of the system should read this case. The ensuing events cost the District a lot of money. Judging by the number of District personnel that were in attendance in the Federal court the day of the decision, one wonders what the toll was to the staff over the many years this case ran. Perhaps some were hardened to the process. The Whiteheads proved in Federal court the ensuing events were deemed to be retaliatory by the District.
Click here: Wrightslaw - The Division of Administrative Hearings
Most of the unwritten SP&P’s appear to revolve around clever ways to save money. Ignorance of the law contributes to them being carried out unwittingly by the one's lower on the chain. I remember seeing countless IEP’s that had signatures of staff who did not attend the IEP meeting. How can that happen unless it is part of the culture? The answer lies in the least expensive method for the system to be in compliance with their paperwork. To be morally and ethically compliant to the law and to student’s needs requires money and resources. The recent finding by the state of the unfulfilled OT/PT services should raise an alarm. However, with lack of sanctions, it is business as usual.
While none of us like to have a past of slamming doors, I can relate to the need to take actions that in hindsight are not the best choice, but something has to happen to stop the injustice. I know in the past I have said things that needed to be said, but it needed to be said to someone other than the person I said it to, and came off wrong.
What should now be coming to light is the hidden cost in saving money. While I will reserve my opinion of those who not only obfuscate the truth but defend the parsing to the hilt, what should be a concern for all of us is the impact it has on the quality of life for the employee’s who know the truth and have to live with the distortion. Keeping it from the parents is relatively easy, Having a chilling control on keeping teacher’s quiet is an issue of itself.
Sacred Cows and Unwritten SP&P’s, no matter how cleverly contrived, have a cost.
Blogging affords me the opportunity to present past events in a manner that gives some substance to why I have done the things I have done. One must read my adjacent blog as well. What those who read about me should understand that my cause is not about me, it is about the ethical people within the system, the parents and the students. I have repeatedly seen good hard working people doing the “right thing” be subverted by a system and the people who carry out the system’s desires.
Many pieces of the dysfunctional puzzle are shaped as unwritten SP&Ps within the realm of Special Education. When one has their finger on the pulse of the District, it is not difficult to recognize these unwritten SP&P’s. One of these unwritten policies was brought out as a finding in the Whitehead vs. HCDS case. The allegation was that the District had an unwritten policy to not write individual speech therapy into an IEP as a related service. My understanding is someone, who apparently did not know this unwritten policy, first wrote individual speech therapy into the IEP. Another IEP was convened soon after that to discuss something else, and when the IEP was updated, the individual speech therapy was removed from the new IEP, without discussion.
"66. Respondent violated the procedural requirements relating to the formulation and implementation of Andrew W.’s IEP by the following actions:
(a) Implementing a policy of omitting from IEPs specific speech/language services that will be provided to an individual, irrespective of the individual’s needs for specific speech/language services. '
One interested in learning the mechanisms of the system should read this case. The ensuing events cost the District a lot of money. Judging by the number of District personnel that were in attendance in the Federal court the day of the decision, one wonders what the toll was to the staff over the many years this case ran. Perhaps some were hardened to the process. The Whiteheads proved in Federal court the ensuing events were deemed to be retaliatory by the District.
Click here: Wrightslaw - The Division of Administrative Hearings
Most of the unwritten SP&P’s appear to revolve around clever ways to save money. Ignorance of the law contributes to them being carried out unwittingly by the one's lower on the chain. I remember seeing countless IEP’s that had signatures of staff who did not attend the IEP meeting. How can that happen unless it is part of the culture? The answer lies in the least expensive method for the system to be in compliance with their paperwork. To be morally and ethically compliant to the law and to student’s needs requires money and resources. The recent finding by the state of the unfulfilled OT/PT services should raise an alarm. However, with lack of sanctions, it is business as usual.
While none of us like to have a past of slamming doors, I can relate to the need to take actions that in hindsight are not the best choice, but something has to happen to stop the injustice. I know in the past I have said things that needed to be said, but it needed to be said to someone other than the person I said it to, and came off wrong.
What should now be coming to light is the hidden cost in saving money. While I will reserve my opinion of those who not only obfuscate the truth but defend the parsing to the hilt, what should be a concern for all of us is the impact it has on the quality of life for the employee’s who know the truth and have to live with the distortion. Keeping it from the parents is relatively easy, Having a chilling control on keeping teacher’s quiet is an issue of itself.
Sacred Cows and Unwritten SP&P’s, no matter how cleverly contrived, have a cost.
Saturday, September 8, 2007
Name that Tune - Living in the USA or Suspicious Minds
I will present a hypothetical situation. I am interested in any one's response. At least mull it over for the implications.
There is a parent who owns a business. There are 100's of patrons to this business. It has a good reputation. At the time of my hypothetical situation, the business had been operative right at 20 years.
During this 20 years, there have been countless employee's of the HCDS who have used this business. No problems. In fact, the good reputation is why so many used it.
In the last 16 years, this same parent/business owner has had a child enrolled in the HCDS. There was an older kid than the one below.
It was happenstance that one of the business patrons was also an HCDS employee and was also involved with the second child of the business owner. The relationship was positive both as patron/business owner and HCDS employee/parent. In fact, the relationship between HCDS employee and parent spanned almost 14 years. Relationship started when kid was 4 months old and was extremely positive. HCDS employee was extremely competent in her area.
Due to circumstances that evolved, the relationship between the parent and the HCDS became adversarial. The above mentioned relationship remained the same.
Within a few weeks of an event that "drew a line in the sand" between parent and HCDS, the above mentioned patron of the parent's business (employee of the HCDS) was told by some one in the District to not do business with parent/business owner, as it was a "conflict of interest".
Fast forward. Business has now been operative 32 years. Still has patrons of HCDS. No issues.
Change the hypothectical to a real event. Mull it over. Let me know what you think.
There is a parent who owns a business. There are 100's of patrons to this business. It has a good reputation. At the time of my hypothetical situation, the business had been operative right at 20 years.
During this 20 years, there have been countless employee's of the HCDS who have used this business. No problems. In fact, the good reputation is why so many used it.
In the last 16 years, this same parent/business owner has had a child enrolled in the HCDS. There was an older kid than the one below.
It was happenstance that one of the business patrons was also an HCDS employee and was also involved with the second child of the business owner. The relationship was positive both as patron/business owner and HCDS employee/parent. In fact, the relationship between HCDS employee and parent spanned almost 14 years. Relationship started when kid was 4 months old and was extremely positive. HCDS employee was extremely competent in her area.
Due to circumstances that evolved, the relationship between the parent and the HCDS became adversarial. The above mentioned relationship remained the same.
Within a few weeks of an event that "drew a line in the sand" between parent and HCDS, the above mentioned patron of the parent's business (employee of the HCDS) was told by some one in the District to not do business with parent/business owner, as it was a "conflict of interest".
Fast forward. Business has now been operative 32 years. Still has patrons of HCDS. No issues.
Change the hypothectical to a real event. Mull it over. Let me know what you think.
Saturday, September 1, 2007
Thankfully someone has the fortitude to enforce freedom of speech.
This has been copied from http://soundoffandbeheard.blogspot.com/2007/08/superintendents-evaluation.html
It appears that virgin cynic is a teacher that has been blocked from reaching a School Board member's blog.
Modern technology will change the playing field for those who derive their power by controlling the flow of information.
"virgin cynic said...
While I am able to read your postings, my ability to read or leave a comments is BLOCKED! This is a recent change.I tried today, Friday, during my lunch period.Not sure I like that Ms. Griffin but I am willing to listen to why this may have been changed.
August 31, 2007 9:00 PM
April Griffin said...
Virgin Cynic,I had my site unblocked by the IT department a while back and was told it had been taken care of. I told them this site was a tool to interact with my constituents, including staff. Staff should be able to communicate with a school board member without any roadblocks. Blocking it is hampering my ability to do the job I was elected to do and I will take care of this problem.Thanks for the heads-up, April
September 1, 2007 9:23 AM
It appears that virgin cynic is a teacher that has been blocked from reaching a School Board member's blog.
Modern technology will change the playing field for those who derive their power by controlling the flow of information.
"virgin cynic said...
While I am able to read your postings, my ability to read or leave a comments is BLOCKED! This is a recent change.I tried today, Friday, during my lunch period.Not sure I like that Ms. Griffin but I am willing to listen to why this may have been changed.
August 31, 2007 9:00 PM
April Griffin said...
Virgin Cynic,I had my site unblocked by the IT department a while back and was told it had been taken care of. I told them this site was a tool to interact with my constituents, including staff. Staff should be able to communicate with a school board member without any roadblocks. Blocking it is hampering my ability to do the job I was elected to do and I will take care of this problem.Thanks for the heads-up, April
September 1, 2007 9:23 AM
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
HCPS Board Spat
http://blogs.tampabay.com/schools/2007/08/hillsborough--2.html?cid=80895545#comment-80895545
I wasn't there. I don't know what was said nor how it was said. But trouble has been brewing, and now it is at a high simmer. Having watched the last Board meeting and saw and heard what was said, and since I recorded it, I have replayed certain parts so I can see it more clearly, I have a question. There were specific comments made during the meeting and the word "disconnect" was used. At least twice the Superintendent made a point that if any Board member had any questions about issues, they should come to her "first". I assume "second" is speaking about it to the public.
Since that meeting, the information came out about Ms. Faliero not living in her respective area. First the St. Pete Times and then the Tampa Tribune reported it with seemingly different perspectives, even if one just read the headlines. I may have missed what responsibility the local Board has to govern their own regarding this matter, but I haven't seen it.
So today, Ms. Faliero apparently asks/tells? Ms. Griffin to resign.
Now to my question: Had Ms. Griffin or Ms. Valdes taken the same action as Ms. Faliero and moved temporarily and initially denied it to the press, and then asked/told another Board member to resign, would the local administration be more open about sanctioning them?
I wasn't there. I don't know what was said nor how it was said. But trouble has been brewing, and now it is at a high simmer. Having watched the last Board meeting and saw and heard what was said, and since I recorded it, I have replayed certain parts so I can see it more clearly, I have a question. There were specific comments made during the meeting and the word "disconnect" was used. At least twice the Superintendent made a point that if any Board member had any questions about issues, they should come to her "first". I assume "second" is speaking about it to the public.
Since that meeting, the information came out about Ms. Faliero not living in her respective area. First the St. Pete Times and then the Tampa Tribune reported it with seemingly different perspectives, even if one just read the headlines. I may have missed what responsibility the local Board has to govern their own regarding this matter, but I haven't seen it.
So today, Ms. Faliero apparently asks/tells? Ms. Griffin to resign.
Now to my question: Had Ms. Griffin or Ms. Valdes taken the same action as Ms. Faliero and moved temporarily and initially denied it to the press, and then asked/told another Board member to resign, would the local administration be more open about sanctioning them?
Friday, August 24, 2007
Our Board member under question
http://www.sptimes.com/2007/08/24/Hillsborough/Move_may_violate_stat.shtml
This story does not sit well for those of us who have little faith in the system. This lack of faith was built on many, many many isolated incidents.
How can I believe that my representative who used to live in the "stereotype of your choice of southeast Hillsborough county" and now lives in the "stereotype of your choice of Davis Island" has southeast Hillsborough County at heart. I so much want to believe in the people I vote for.
I might as well have voted for someone that has been entrenched in the status quo of the system and represents the District instead of the people who vote them in.
Lets see, to drive from Davis Island to the ROSSAC building, I would cross through uh, uh, well I would cross over a short bridge in Tampa, and then a couple of blocks, turn right on Kennedy and voila - at work.
Now the whole evaluation comments make sense.
Click here: http://www.sdhc.k12.fl.us/boardagenda/pdfs/BD20070821_264/Attch_20070821_264_E8.01A.pdf
Had this been out in the open, the whole perspective would be different along with the amount of empathy.
Oh me of little faith with just a broad brush to paint with.
This story does not sit well for those of us who have little faith in the system. This lack of faith was built on many, many many isolated incidents.
How can I believe that my representative who used to live in the "stereotype of your choice of southeast Hillsborough county" and now lives in the "stereotype of your choice of Davis Island" has southeast Hillsborough County at heart. I so much want to believe in the people I vote for.
I might as well have voted for someone that has been entrenched in the status quo of the system and represents the District instead of the people who vote them in.
Lets see, to drive from Davis Island to the ROSSAC building, I would cross through uh, uh, well I would cross over a short bridge in Tampa, and then a couple of blocks, turn right on Kennedy and voila - at work.
Now the whole evaluation comments make sense.
Click here: http://www.sdhc.k12.fl.us/boardagenda/pdfs/BD20070821_264/Attch_20070821_264_E8.01A.pdf
Had this been out in the open, the whole perspective would be different along with the amount of empathy.
Oh me of little faith with just a broad brush to paint with.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
The Training of Coded Language-Another Brush, Another Incident, but keeping out of legal jeopardy
I spoke of the coded language that is taught in IDEA training meetings. I have spoken about obfuscation of the law by those who should know. The following is straight from a publication that is developed by the District for the District.
______________________________________________
http://www1.sdhc.k12.fl.us/~ese.dept/communicators/ESEComm1104.pdf
From : THE EXCEPTIONAL COMMUNICATOR November-December, 2004 Vol. 4 No. 4
WHAT NOT TO SAY AT IEP MEETINGS !
When parents make requests at IEP meetings there are some things that you shouldn’t say in
response; using these phrases could place the district in legal jeopardy if the parent files for
due process later on:
We can’t do… - We don’t believe…
No student gets more than… It would cost too much to…
It would take too much... We don’t do…
We never do… We only do…
Instead, show you’re listening by asking:
Where did you hear about that ?
Which IEP goals do you see that addressing ?
Do you have data on that ? Can you get us information?
Have we described what we’re doing in the program we’re using ?
________________________________________________________
This speaks volumes to one who understands the game. I don't care who wrote it. But it is pretty clear that the focus is on protecting the system -gate keeping if you will.It also clearly says to "show you are listening by asking...." as to "show you are listening by answering the question or addressing the issue".If one honestly looks at these feigned "listening strategies" it is no wonder that the special education realm is frustrating for all. I continually hear about teacher retention and the teacher shortage in special ed. Dealing with students and parents is a hell of task. But dealing with a system that "shows you are listening" does not work.
______________________________________________
http://www1.sdhc.k12.fl.us/~ese.dept/communicators/ESEComm1104.pdf
From : THE EXCEPTIONAL COMMUNICATOR November-December, 2004 Vol. 4 No. 4
WHAT NOT TO SAY AT IEP MEETINGS !
When parents make requests at IEP meetings there are some things that you shouldn’t say in
response; using these phrases could place the district in legal jeopardy if the parent files for
due process later on:
We can’t do… - We don’t believe…
No student gets more than… It would cost too much to…
It would take too much... We don’t do…
We never do… We only do…
Instead, show you’re listening by asking:
Where did you hear about that ?
Which IEP goals do you see that addressing ?
Do you have data on that ? Can you get us information?
Have we described what we’re doing in the program we’re using ?
________________________________________________________
This speaks volumes to one who understands the game. I don't care who wrote it. But it is pretty clear that the focus is on protecting the system -gate keeping if you will.It also clearly says to "show you are listening by asking...." as to "show you are listening by answering the question or addressing the issue".If one honestly looks at these feigned "listening strategies" it is no wonder that the special education realm is frustrating for all. I continually hear about teacher retention and the teacher shortage in special ed. Dealing with students and parents is a hell of task. But dealing with a system that "shows you are listening" does not work.
How do we know this does not happen here? Oh me of little faith.
Click here: Broward school district ties with tech consultant questioned -- South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com
A long-standing relationship between the Broward school district and its top technology consultant underscores weaknesses in the school system's ethical safeguards, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel has found
"Board members are now asking about the relationships between the school system and vendors. Should former school district employees be allowed to work for vendors they dealt with as government officials? Should high-ranking district officials, including volunteers who sit on advisory boards, be banned from accepting free trips from vendors?"
I guess it is our faith in God -oops - leaders that this kind of stuff doesn't happen in a deep rooted system such as ours. Does the Tribune have investigative reporters similar to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel. Is there a watchdog group of any kind around here. Not that anyone should be policing the District, but just making sure there weren't any isolated incidents like this.
A long-standing relationship between the Broward school district and its top technology consultant underscores weaknesses in the school system's ethical safeguards, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel has found
"Board members are now asking about the relationships between the school system and vendors. Should former school district employees be allowed to work for vendors they dealt with as government officials? Should high-ranking district officials, including volunteers who sit on advisory boards, be banned from accepting free trips from vendors?"
I guess it is our faith in God -oops - leaders that this kind of stuff doesn't happen in a deep rooted system such as ours. Does the Tribune have investigative reporters similar to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel. Is there a watchdog group of any kind around here. Not that anyone should be policing the District, but just making sure there weren't any isolated incidents like this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
