Free and Appropriate Choice

Free and Appropriate Choice

As many people know the new U.S. Secretary for Education is not a big fan of public schools and is a huge fan of school choice.  She has never attended a public school of any kind; she just doesn't like them.

Now the issue of whether families of children with disabilities should have vouchers that presumably would allow them to attend the school of their parents’ choice is being debated.

First some background.  At the present time federal funds pay for approximately 16% of the cost of educating children with disabilities.  Back in 1975 when the Education of all Handicapped Children Act (EHA) was passed, the law authorized a federal contribution up to 40%.   The federal contribution has only been appropriated at about 16%.

This is how the system currently works.  The feds dole out the funds based on the number of children in a state who are of school age.  That is ALL children in the state, not just the ones with disabilities.  There is a differential for states with a large number of children in poverty.  Special education is more expensive than general education.  So, it stands to fiscal policy that states with fewer kids identified as having special needs and needing special education will be able to pocket more of the money that is distributed based on the total number of students.  Some states, Texas for one, have capped the percentage of children who can be identified as disabled.  That issue is presently in the courts.

The IDEA money (IDEA is the successor to EHA) works out to about $1,800 per child with disabilities in the various states.

It has been suggested that the feds would provide that amount of money to the states based on a child count of children with disabilities.  In that scenario, states that identified more kids with disabilities would get more money.  BUT, once the child is identified as having a disability and needing special education, the states would need to provide that education.  The cost to do that would greatly exceed the additional $1,800.

From the point-of-view of the new Secretary of Education, families would be given that money to use to buy a program for their child at any place of their choosing.  There are several problems with this approach.  First of all, $1,800 is simply not enough money to buy any program, let alone one that meets the needs of a child with disabilities.  If it were enough, the public schools would be all over it.  So, what you really have is a subsidy to parents who can already afford the private placement.

Another issue is what kind of program will parents buy.  If they buy a plain private school, one that does not offer special programming, they will be giving up their child’s right to due process, an IEP and all the special services provided in the law.  If parents have the funds to buy a private special ed program, $1,800 will barely scratch the surface.

This approach has the potential to be a lose-lose situation.  Public schools will lose the value of the confluence of funds that together can do more than one $1,800 payment. They will lose significant resources.  There is no guarantee that children will be better served.   Many will give up their rights under IDEA.  Other kids who live in rural areas won’t even have a private school option.  Most likely more children with disabilities will be short-changed on the guarantee of a free, appropriate public education.  Who gains in all this?   Wealthy parents who were going to send their kids to a special education private school anyway, will have a coupon (voucher) to reduce the cost.

For the majority of families this is no choice at all.  Under which cup did the street corner barker hide the ball?   Keep focused because the trick is to deflect your attention elsewhere while you are fooled into thinking you are a winner.

Where oh where have all the tests gone?

Where oh Where have all the tests gone?

Lots of people have lots of issues with the Common Core State Standards curriculum.  Turns out so does the President.  But not to worry about that.  The President’s advisor, Kellyanne Conway, has repeatedly asserted that Trump will keep his campaign promise to do away with Common Core.

Of course, there are a couple of glitches in that effort.  First of all, Common Core is not a federal program.  Common Core was created by representatives of the individual states which then individually choose to adopt the curriculum or not.  No one at the federal level wrote or participated in the creation of the Common Core so there is nothing to be repealed at the federal level. 

The Common Core is a curriculum.   Therein, creates another problem.  The federal Every Student Succeed Act (ESSA) explicity forbids the federal government from imposing curricula on the states.  So while the President may fume and bluster, he does not have the authority by himself to change anything about it.

However, Common Core may be falling under its own weight.  One of the aspects of Common Core is the creation of a test to measure how well students have mastered the curriculum.  Initially almost all of the states had signed on to either Smarter Balanced (I always thought that sounded like a substitute for butter) or PARCC (Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers.)   Today there are only 19 states plus the District of Columbia that are still using these assessments.  By contrast, 28 states are using tests they have either designed or purchased for their use.  Three states are using a blend of PARCC or Smarter Balanced. 

ESSA does require the states to use some measure of accountability.  Using the SAT or the ACT is an option under the law and is definitely gaining in acceptance.  First of all, many students need these tests for college admission so it is not an additional test at a time when parents are complaining about the amount of time in school spent on testing rather than instruction.  Secondly, using the ACT and/or the SAT is more relevant to the student’s future.  Currently, 25 states are requiring all students to take these tests.   Twelve of those states are using these tests to meet the ESSA requirements.

Another change is the number of states that are requiring students to pass a high stakes test to receive a high school diploma.  Only twelve states insist on the passing of a high stakes test in order for a student to get a diploma.   The remaining states have menu options to work around a failing grade on the so-called high stakes assessment.

Maybe, just maybe, the standardized testing miracle cure has reached its zenith and is beginning to decline.   Trump may not be able to do anything about Common Core, but perhaps that famous oxymoron common sense will begin to prevail.

Hello! Is anyone home?

Hello, Is Anyone Home?

A public high school teacher at Milford Mill Academy in Baltimore, County Maryland admitted to propping up his phone to record female cheerleader students change into their uniforms in his room.

Here is what happened.  On January 23, seven teenage girls were in his classroom getting ready to change into their uniforms.  The teacher told the cheerleading coach, another teacher, that the girls could use his room to change and that he would leave the room.  BUT before he did so, he propped up his phone and set it to record the changing process.  One of the girls saw what was happening and grabbed the phone and took it to the cheerleading coach.

Here is where it gets bad and messy.   The cheerleading coach (remember this is another teacher on staff) did nothing about the episode.   HOWEVER, that afternoon one of the girls and her mother went to the Pikesville police station and filed a report against the teacher.  The next day, January 24, detectives interviewed the teacher in question at the school.   The teacher admitted during the interview with the detectives that he had recorded the girls changing in his room on at least two other separate occasions.   The girls have changed at least five times in this classroom.  The teacher is charged with conducting visual surveillance with prurient intent.   If convicted he could face one year in prison and a $2,500 fine.  Detectives found search sites on the teacher’s phone for pornography and cheerleader. 

The BIG question is where is Baltimore County Public Schools in this mess.   We keep getting back to the old Nixon questions.   What did they know and when did they know it?   Did the cheerleading coach and teacher, file a report with the school administration and/or with Child Protective Services as she is required by law to do?   If not, why not and what will be the consequences to her?   If she did, why wasn’t that in the article?   What did the Milford Mill Academy administration do with the information?  The official word from the central administration of the school district is that the system “took immediate and appropriate action”.   If it did, why did it fall to the cheerleader and her mother to press charges before the police got involved?  The spokesman also said that the teacher, with 8 years’ experience, is no longer at Milford Mill.  Where is he?  Is this the dance of the lemons and he has been moved to another unsuspecting school?  Or had he been booted to the central office where the taxpayers continue to pay his salary while he does “make work”.

The great state of Texas doesn’t track teachers who have been charged with or convicted of a crime.  In many cases the information is kept secret and individuals find other jobs in other districts.

Will Baltimore County protect this teacher and will he find other jobs in other school districts and spy on more kids?   How much worse will it get?

The Baltimore County Crimes Against Children unit is investigating and seeking additional information.

Hello Baltimore County Public Schools are you awake and watching out for our kids?