A group of Chicago-area parents are none too pleased by a school district proposal to eliminate a school for kids with severe disabilities in favor of inclusion in a typical school.
Officials with the Evanston-Skokie District 65 want to close a special education-specific school and move all of the students into mainstream classes. The idea, they say, is to remove the stigma of special education and turn it into “a service, rather than a place.”
But the plan has parents up in arms. Many parents say they’ve already tried inclusion to no avail and believe that a segregated environment best serves their children’s needs. Further, they say they are fearful of what will happen to their children without the support of staff trained to address the physical, emotional and educational needs of students with severe limitations.
The school district’s plan is similar to efforts across the country over the last 20 years as inclusion became the norm for special education students. Attempts at widespread inclusion across entire schools or districts have been met with varying levels of success, reports the Chicago Sun-Times. To read more click here.
The same debate is going on in Montgomery County, Md. The Montgomery Primary Achievement Center, a specialized preschool that has been serving children for 50 years, is in jeopardy because the county instead wants to send the kids to typical schools. They are saying children will be disbursed to schools throughout the county, but no teachers have been hired, no training program is in place, and the county did not include MPAC or parents in this decision. This is not even being presented as a cost issue, so they are simply turning their backs on a reliable partner and proven program in the name of “least restrictive environment.” My daughter attended MPAC for three years, and I couldn’t care less about it being “a place” — it was a place that effectively met her needs and supported our family. They should expand and replicate programs like this for the children who need them, and maximize inclusion when and where it makes sense.
MMiller said “This is not even being presented as a cost issue”.
It is a cost issue dissised as a “LRE” issue.
The IDEA says about LRE
“2) Each public agency must ensure that–
(i) To the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities,
including children in public or private institutions or other care
facilities, are educated with children who are nondisabled; and
(ii) Special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of
children with disabilities from the regular educational environment
occurs only if the nature or severity of the disability is such that
education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and
services cannot be achieved satisfactorily.”
But it also says in the Continuum of alternative placements ”
a) Each public agency must ensure that a continuum of alternative
placements is available to meet the needs of children with disabilities
for special education and related services.
(b) The continuum required in paragraph (a) of this section must–
(1) Include the alternative placements listed in the definition of special education under Sec. 300.38 (instruction in regular classes, special classes, special schools, home instruction, and instruction in hospitals and institutions).
To show an extreme situation, should a child in a hospital in a full body cast be wheeled into an inclusive classroom every day?
Keep standing up parents. The Least Restrictive Environment is not the same for all special needs children. Those with multiple and severe disabilities may need a special center, at least when they are young. It is hard to meet therapeutic needs in a regular school and if advanced behavioral technques are needed, the staff does not need anyone reporting them for child abuse. A self contained class in a regular school, the next step up, is not approrpiate for runners or severe autistics although most severe/profound kids can handle the setting and enjoy it. I had to put a latch on my classroom door because I had a runner. It just was not safe otherwise and I was not going to restrain him as the previous teachers had done.
Inclusion is a political issue. The parents of a student in inclusive classes always need to know and ask the question, “How will my child learn anything in an environment that is not set up for his needs.” The real answer is, he won’t and regular teachers will think he is not bright enough to learn anything at all. He might develop some social skills but the cognitive, independent living, vocational, and domestic living skills will go by the wayside as soon as he can’t keep up academically. Ideally, special education is on a wing and the special needs children who cannot function in regular classes are included as is appropriate for each individual. At the same time, if a child can benefit from academic inclusion, there should be no barriers to his being there.
IDEA needs to be modified. A few years ago the parents of students with mild disabilities prevailed. It is time that those of kids with severe disabilities had more input and the understanding of a true LRE became clear again.
I agree that these overzealous pushes for inclusion are often ways to cut money for special education without admitting as much. My suspicion is this is the case in Montgomery County, MD. That they won’t present this as “we’re cutting money from the preschool budget” so they make up this nonsense that it is good for the kids.
I think a big issue in Montgomery County, in particular, is whether the County wishes to provide a good special education program or whether the County want to do simply what is required under the law. This move to make the programs community-based and trying to railroad it through with LRE rhetoric leads me to believe it is the latter.
Have the parents asked their children what they want ? We as parents don’t always help our children who have a significant disability…
Inclusion a political issue? Disagree.. With qualified educational staff members who can also see beyond the disability, inclusion can work. How about we promote inclusion and understand that some students may not succeed in a regular classroom rather than promote seclusion and criticize inclusion.
We teach students without disabilities about civil rights, respect, integrity, self-esteem, self-confidence, only to have adults waiting behind to rip away the hope to change the world .. My son who has multiple disabilities and does not speak verbally understands this corrupt and hateful world — he has asked me to continue to advocate for him to be in regular ed classes and involved in his high school. It was agreed that if he decides he no longer wants to persevere with his vision (that cannot be achieved if secluded), I would stop the fight. The majority of the students who are in his classes have learned how to communicate with him and are disappointed when he is not in school. There are many staff members in his school who continuously advocate for positive change with the “special ed stuff” and it’s becoming a big statement. The message is disability is natural and there are no limits to what one can do … so what if it’s done differently.
To parents who are advocating for inclusion, don’t let the fear of others discourage you … keep the faith and continue to believe in your child.