A Free and Appropriate Education

A great comment from Paula to Wednesday's post that puts special education in Wisconsin into a national context. It deserves to stand alone. My emphasis added. More next week.- Paul

Federal law states that in the U.S. every child has a right to a free and appropriate education no matter if the child is gifted & talented, average, or below average. Some children will cost more to educate than others.

There is an illusion that kids come with their abilities and needs stamped on their foreheads. As you have stated, we educate students with a huge range of intellectual, emotional, physical, linguistic, and economic needs. In special education, these needs are defined by arbitrary cut-offs and definitions. The premise is that these categories can be used as predictors of education costs to be incurred by specific disability and need.

Thirty years ago many of these students were kept in residential facilities that came with high price tags and questionable human rights issues. We have come a long way in education by recognizing that the children we educate cannot be neatly classified into a category or definition (even though funding is still by category). They present with a variety of abilities and needs. One of these needs is to be with their peers.

Federal laws recognize this need, and individual educational plans (IEP's) are written especially with this in mind. Students are to be educated first and foremost with their general ed. peers. When the federal government first enacted these laws (now known as IDEA), they were also to provide the states with monies that would make specialized education feasible. This money would then be passed on to the school districts according to their categorical special ed. needs. The federal government has not kept its promise to the states and in turn the states have not kept their funding promises to our school districts. The percent of funding for special education costs has decreased significantly since the 80's.

The federal law (IDEA) mandates free and appropriate education to all. It is set up to protect the individual learning needs and rights of children. On the other hand, No Child Left Behind (NCLB)does not operate on that principle. Basically it assumes that all children are college bound. In essence it treats all kids as equals in that it doesn't acknowledge their differences. All children are thrown into the same learning "pot" and they lose their individuality. Schools are not seen as communities of learners with a variety of abilities, interests, and needs, but instead they are seen as a total 'score' on a questionable snapshot of a test.

The sad part is that each state was allowed to present its own form of student evaluation, and there is quite a bit of variance state-to-state on how students in special education fit into that equation. Some states have ways to credit those students whose learning objectives do not readily fit into academic standards and benchmarks. Schools are financially credited for the progress these students make on measurable IEP goals in an equal manner to that of standard curricular learners.

Unfortunately Wisconsin is not one of these states. While our state does offer an alternative evaluation for the purpose of NCLB scoring, it does not treat the children who take this assessment in an equal manner to their peers. This is how Wisconsin schools are funded according to scoring on state tests: Advanced - 3 pts; proficient - 2 pts; basic - 1 pt.; minimal - .5 pt.; alternative test - 0 pts. As you can see, it literally does not "pay" to score certain special education students on the alternative assessment that truly tracks their progress. Even one darkened-in answer on the standardized state test, although it may be incorrect, will bring a score of "minimal" and weighting of .5 to the school's total. This type of assessment and scoring takes a law such as NCLB, which is not as effective as it could be, to a new level of absurdity. It doesn't take into consideration the "needs" of the children or those of the school.

Basically it all boils down to the original premise and law. Every kid in the USA has the right to a free and appropriate education no matter what their ability or economic status. Some children will cost more to educate than others. All children are our future for better or for worse. We, as the current adults in this society, have a duty to provide the funding for this education. It's time we hold federal, state and local feet to the fire. Education is costly any way you slice it, but so is any worthwhile investment.

Comments

[Jack Lohman]

Excellent article. With seven grandchildren I am naturally concerned. I'd like to see free higher education for all, but I recognize that some kids are not capable of being doctors. “Appropriate” education is the key. We must start early and voice often the need for school kids to choose an appropriate direction. If they are best suited for cooking they should go to culinary school. If they are qualified to be physicians, to medical school. And if they rank in the top 10% of their class they should receive a 100% rebate, with progressively lower rebates down to a C average. This provides incentive to be better and study harder, and it truly leaves no child behind.

But we cannot break the bank on this. I would limit the rebates to mainstream occupations that are needed in society. I'd demand career counseling and testing to ensure that individuals are not entering a career they are sure to fail at.

[Dan Sebald]

Break the bank.

My attitude is that the federal government has warped our priorities in this country by spending on unnecessary wars, missile defense shield and big business boondoggles to the hilt, and that has put our financial solvency in jeopardy. Because the administration and congress were unwilling to ask a sacrifice of a country at endless war by putting the cost on credit, it is the children now in question who will have to deal with an impending crisis. (They'll need a good education!!)

Tax and spend = borrow and spend.

I'd rather break the bank spending on education than on new bunker busting nuclear bombs.