Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Forest Grove Case
On Tuesday, April 28, 2009, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments of Forest Grove v. T.A. The full transcript of the hearing can be gotten from
the Court's website: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/08-305.pdf.
One of the first things to note is that, in addition to the usual representation of Petitioner (Forest Grove) and Respondent (T.A.), the Department of Justice sent a representative as amicus curiae on behalf of T.A. Essentially, the Feds are backing the parents!
Justice Ginsburg seems to understand special ed law best. She states
"there will be no reimbursement if the agency has made a free appropriate public education available to the child and the parents elected to place the child in private school. But that 'if' ..."
is a biggie. She goes on to say
"what happens in a case ... where the child doesn't receive special education because the school has determined that the child is not eligible? So the child isn't getting public education, and in the parents' view, confirmed by experts, the child is in need of special education, can't get it from the public schools, because they declared the child ineligible. What is such a parent to do?"
This is something we have been saying for a long time - what is a parent to do?
Justice Stevens said:
"But [school district] don't have a risk under your view of the law as I understand it. [The school district] could take that position [that the district is adamant that the student does not need special ed services] and they would never be liable ..."
Then Justice Stevens added:
"Doesn't [the school district's attorney] interpretation of the statute create an incentive for the school board to just say, we'll never provide any kind of education, special education, we will just tough it out? Because they can't lose, they can't be liable if they do that ..."
Justice Scalia, known for his conservative approach, summed up the thought of all of us:
"[The School District] can't profit by [its] own malfeasance."
[In the transcript reading ...] just when we thought the Justices were swayed to the parents, Chief Justice Roberts brought up interpretations of the "ten day" rule in the IDEA - that a parent has to give the district ten days notice before removing the child from the public school environment. Then, the Chief Justice brought up the fiscal impact on districts having to pay for special education services.
Reading through the full transcript is quite interesting. You can visualize some of the Justices getting into the flow and others just floundering about on specific language.
Now we have to wait to hear the decision. We live in interesting times. |
|
Tug of War Over Costs to Educate the Autistic
New York Times article contains interesting numbers and attitudes |
In the April 19, 2009 New York Times, Amanda M. Fairbanks reports on the personal and financial costs of having a child with autism. Here are some of the highlights:
Attitude (commendable)
A quote by Jaime Nicklas, educational director of the Brooklyn Autism Center Academy: "Every child with autism can learn. If they are not learning, it is our responsibility to change our teaching procedure ...". Wow, if only that attitude was contagious!
Factoids
More than 6,800 children with autism are in the NYC's public schools -- 4,200 in special ed classes with a small student-to-teacher ratio, 285 students with autism are taught alongside regular ed students, and 28 are in the New York Center for Autism Charter School, receiving one-to-one education.
For all special education students, the NYC DOE paid $88.9 million for private school tuition last year, up from $57.6 million in 2007. [Before you shout 'holy matzoh balls!', note that the entire DOE budget for 2007 was $17 billion. So we are talking about a fraction of one percent for all of special ed private schooling].
Attitude (not commendable)
Michael Best, the NYC DOE's general counsel, is quoted as saying "Private school tuition claims are a growing burden for us". Later, Mr. Best says "We are concerned that some parents see this as a way for us to pay for private school. It's not supposed to be a vehicle to get private school tuition if there's something appropriate available in the public schools." [If Mr. Best sees all parents of disabled students as nefariously seeking private schooling at the DOE's expense, then it is little wonder that the DOE throws impediments at our parents' legal rights to reimbursement.
The one thing that Mr. Best says in the quote that is true is 'if there's something appropriate'. The DOE has a dearth of appropriate programs. As Ms. Fairbanks article points out, there are a total of 28 seats in the 1:1 autism charter school]. |
|
NYC Education Reforms Fail Students with Disabilities |
The ARISE Coalition has analyzed the Children First Reforms implemented by Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Education Department Chancellor Joel Klein.
Among the findings, ARISE points out:
- students with disabilities are still denied equal access to facilities and programs;
- the graduation rate for students with disabilities has risen only half as much as the nondisabled students;
- students in self-contained special ed classes have a graduation rate of less than 5%, and are 2.5 times more likely to drop out than special ed students in other settings;
- students with disabilities are largely excluded from new small high schools.
The ARISE Coalition proposes, among other things, that the NYC DOE issue a directive to schools that discrimination against students with disabilities is prohibited, and that corrective action will be taken against schools that break this policy.
|
|
|
|
Ravitch OpEd Piece Nails Mayor Bloomberg on Education Record
Synopsis of NY Times April 10th Piece
Diane Ravitch is a research professor of education at NYU. She wrote an OpEd piece in the 4/10 NY Times that is worthy of our attention. The article talks about general education, not special ed, but can easily be extrapolated to our special ed needs.
According to the author, the record on mayoral control of schools is unimpressive. Claims that test scores are up are not verifiable. On the federal National Assessment of Educational Process shows miniscule improvement between 2003 and 2007, with no gains in 4th grade reading, 8th grade reading or math.
The graduation rate is also overstated, comparable to that of Mississippi (which spends a third of what NYC does to educate per student).
For those students who do graduate, they often find themselves underprepared for what comes next. For those going on to college, 75% of NYC's graduates fail CUNY placement exams and must take remedial classses in basic skills.
| |
End Notes
I was thinking about the newly appointed Special Ed Czar, Garth Harries, and his lack of experience in the world of special ed, his possible economizations, and his reorganization.
The reorganization of NYC Special Ed reminded me of a fragment of a quote. I googled for several hours to recover this gem, attributed to Detronius Arbiter in 210 B.C.:
"... we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing; and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization".
Some observations are so true as to span the two millenia between Detronius and now.
Sincerely,
Susan Luger
Susan Luger Associates, Inc.
|
|
|
|
NYC Special Ed Czar Appointed |
|
|
Concern over lack of special education experience
Garth Harries is the newly appointed Senior Coordinator for Special Education. Harries is a lawyer with no experience in special education, let alone general education.
In a recent meeting, Mr. Harries acknowledged that he expects budgetary and organizational issues to arise. He denies his goal is cost-saving and reorganization.
At meetings with District 75 parents and the UFT, skepticism abounded at Mr. Harries sentiments.
|
| Share this Newsletter with your friends and colleagues by forwarding this email to them. |
If you learn of any newsworthy item related to Special Education, contact us with the information. |
|
|
