As a teacher who has worked in several special education settings
since 2004, two major issues stand out. The most pressing matters I have
encountered include contention over the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)
in regard to how it affects students with disabilities, as well as the
cumbersome referral process.
As part of testing required by the No Child Left Behind Act,
an anonymous local school district (not mine) mandated a former
colleague to administer a modified version of the High School
Proficiency Exam (HSPE) to an eighteen-year-old student, "Lucia" with
developmental delays. According to my teacher friend, the district
required her to rewrite grade-level test and content area questions to
assess Lucia. My colleague did not administer the test with glee, as
Lucia performs academically on a first/second grade level and has severe
speech delays. How is it possible to test a student on twelfth grade
level content when she performs academically on a primary grade level?
Is that an accurate measure of data?
Instead of spending hours
creating the test, assessing Lucia, and conjuring voodoo data, would not
time, efforts, and educational dollars be better spent on teaching the
student important and meaningful life skills, and assessing her on
information that is important and pertinent for Lucia as an individual?
The referral process for students to be evaluated for special education services is daunting to navigate. Parents
and guardians have told me horror stories of advocating for their
children. They have recounted woeful tales where their efforts were met
with hostility and incompetence on the part of the schools. For example,
last year I tutored a middle school student with dyslexia in language
arts and executive functioning. Previously the girl, "Lulu," had
attended a nonpublic school for students with learning disabilities.
This was her first year in public school. Lulu's grandmother, a feisty
retired attorney, contacted various parties at the school in vain
attempts to facilitate special services for Lulu. Finally, she
researched special education law, whipped up the requisite written
documents, and the school stopped dragging their feet. On one of the
documents for the initial child study meeting, the teacher indicated
that Lulu's dyslexia was due to vision problems! Earlier this school
year, I heard Lulu was skipping class on a regular basis.
I
personally witnessed resistance to referring students for evaluation
when I taught third grade in California. Teachers were overtly
discouraged from initiating referrals of students, and the principal
limited us to referring two students per month. In a child study
meeting, the principal poo-pooed a student's difficulty with decoding
one-syllable words as an "ELL processing issue." If it were an ELL
issue, he would have been able to decode just fine in Spanish, his
native language. During the meeting, she encouraged several teachers to
watch student's behavior and learning and then take action if the
children continued to struggle.
0 comments:
Post a Comment