Can we afford special education?

 Can we afford special education?

 

Many years ago Maryland reimbursed the local districts based on a per pupil allowance depending on the disability.  In fact, local districts got $500 for each “retarded” student (MR that’s what they were called in the “70’s) and $1000 for each student with learning disabilities (LD).  When the bounty changed to allow so much more for LD kids, at least one county in Maryland retested all of its MR students and sooo surprisingly found that the vast majority of those kids were really learning disabled.  And now the school district would get much more money.

The per pupil by disability code funding changed and counties were given lump sums of money depending on the number of students with disabilities who were in their child counts.  Recently the geniuses behind the funding formula have determined that it costs less to educate a child with a speech issue than it does to educate a child with multiple disabilities and contrary to the common wisdom the bulk funding does not even out to cover all students with disabilities.  So Maryland did what all smart politicians do; they hired the American Institutes for Research to do a study.  The study mandated by the legislature will recommend a new funding formula for the local districts.

Public schools have lost 11,000 students this school year.  These kids are not likely to be kids with disabilities.  So with expectations that the number of students with disabilities will remain roughly the same and with the total number of students going down, kids with disabilities now represent a larger percentage of the total student body.

The Blueprint for Maryland’s Future, which is putting billions of dollars into education, does not mention special needs kids at all. The research group has determined that differentiated funding for special ed is the way to go.  All things old are new again.

Fifty years ago the federal government pledged to pay 40% of the cost of educating kids with disabilities.  So far that number has reached between 5-7%, but no higher.

An interesting fact is that because of the non-public funding formula, it actually costs a local school system less to send a child to The Harbour School than it does to educate the child in the local system and the child will benefit from smaller class sizes and all related services.

Can we afford to provide special education to all of our children with disabilities,  really depends on when you ask.

Classical schools teach kids NOT to think

 Classical Schools teach kids to be citizens, not to think.

Classical schools are not about individualizing the curriculum, not even for students with special needs.  Founders is a network of classical education schools that was founded in 2012.  There are 23 “classical” schools in this particular network but there are 275 “classical” schools throughout the country that are not part of a particular network.   Most of the schools are within the sunbelt.  Some folks will tell you that the term “classical” is a “dog whistle term" to attract conservative families with Christian nationalist identities anxious to place their children in schools that reflect early and mid-century values, pedagogy and curriculum”.  The Founding headmaster says they are working against the grain of a progressive utilitarian culture that is taking over public schools.  Kids are NOT supposed to evaluate or think about the content.  There is a great deal of classical knowledge, memorization and public speaking.  The staff speak with horror about schools where teachers meet regularly to discuss student test performance and how that performance can be improved with more individual attention and instruction.

Proponents eschew the notion that education must be utilitarian and designed to help kids get into college or even become employed.  Curriculum should be selected because it is “noble and suitable for a free person”.  The school selects its students by lottery but the kids are not economically privileged.  The median income is $74,000 slightly below the American average.  But the schools are in the south where median incomes are lower overall.   There is diversity in the population; 45% are white, 22% are Asian, 20% Hispanic yet only 7% Black in an area that has a high African American population.  Immigrant families are increasingly applying so that the lower grades are even more diverse.  The school is very clear, gay kids, trans students, even mildly rebellious or slightly weird may apply but they would be very unhappy if admitted. And no accommodations will be made for them.  There is one program which the administrators believe will lead to a well-educated and virtuous citizenry and there are no exceptions, not even to help the student get a job when formal schooling is done.  Some parents think that is just fine.

How do you teach math?

 How do you teach math?

What’s the best way to teach math?  Turns out that depends on whom you ask.  Ask general education teachers and researchers and they will tell you it’s the inquiry-based approach.  This approach emphasizes productive struggle in which students grapple with open-ended challenging problems before a teacher models solutions.

Special ed researchers say that method is all wrong.  In fact, it’s backwards.  They argue that the explicit instruction method is better for all kids.  In this approach step-by-step systematic teaching that breaks down complex tasks will reduce the very tension for which the Inquiry Method is aiming.  In this approach, the teacher models the process first and the students practice what the teacher has modeled.

The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) advocates for the Inquiry Method.  On the other hand, the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) advocates for the Explicit Method.  Groups of special education teachers feel strongly that the Inquiry Method is educational malpractice.  Others argue that many students with math disabilities are in general ed classes and the Inquiry Method will not address the disability nor help kids get over their fear of math.

Special ed researchers charge that the research done to support the Inquiry Method reflects a lack of understanding and familiarity with mathematics-related disabilities.  With the support of the NCTM, the Inquiry Method is taking hold in many states and the high-quality instructional materials that are being rolled out across the country are based on this method.  Even the goals of the approaches are different.  Special ed teachers tend to focus on data-based outcomes and meeting testing standards.  General educators are looking for kids to find “joy” in math and use it to engage in civic life.  

State standards are following the lead of teaching reading and insisting on research-based methodology.  The big question is whose research will be followed and what is the purpose in teaching math?