Seclusion & Restraint in Calvert County Public Schools

[Bann]

Great add. Thank you.

It's my sense that the biggest "problem" is probably not the child or the school system, but the child's/children's parents. And I can't say I blame them; so much self-esteem is packaged with one's kid, I'm surprised more parents don't succumb to the self-pressure of demanding mainstreaming....

I suspect most parents do just fine when their child stands out as a virtuoso, but far less do well when the child is at the other end of the achievement spectrum. Not at all a criticism; my wife and I were blessed to have a nice bunch of "bell curve" kids and upon reflection I'm not sure how well I would have handled it if any of them were of the "+/- 2 Standard Deviations" variety.

Again, thanks for the post.

--- End of line (MCP)

I can tell you that I went through at least 2 dozen IEP meetings, (1 a year and sometimes more than 1 a year, depending) and to hear over & over - from each specialist who worked with my son - that he failed to "measure up" from whichever testing method they might be using for whatever skill - it could be unbearbly heartbreaking. At one point in HS, they were getting ready to re-word his "goal" of the reading skill yet again. My son couldn't process what he read very well, so of course, he tested poorly. As he got older, his comprehension was better, so if they read TO him, or if he listened to it being read on tape, etc. he was not below his age level of comprehension. I finally said out of frustration "he is NEVER going to read faster than what he does right now. This should not be a goal. It sets him up for failure. Use assistive technology - an IPad or some other such aid to increase his learning ability. It's like a blind person - if they cannot SEE, no amount of LIGHT is going to allow them to see!"

Sometimes, it amazed me how stuck to the system the teachers were. To be fair, that is what they had to work with, but still. I fully support the Federal Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) law and the ADA laws. They are in place for a very good reason. The states are given leeway as to HOW to implement those laws, and they're not all the same.

I have a problem with the way things were done PRE the IDEA and ADA laws- like segregating and sticking special ed kids in a basement corner of the building with windows, etc. Often, their civil rights were violated. Even putting them in their own school is discriminatory, because it is segregating. Every human being has civil rights, whether it is inconvenient or not. I think that a school's population benefits from students being able to see one another. I could see a wing devoted to the SpEd. There can be inclusive activities and electives, and not all SpEd students need to be separated out. ALL students can very much benefit from that. However, I also have a problem with sticking or lumping ALL SpEd students into the regular ed classrooms. That is not a perfect fit for all kids and does NOT fit in the spririt of the law where every student is entitled to a free and approprite edcuation in the LEAST RESTRICTIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR THEM. I think in the last decade at least we've gotten away from doing what is best for the student, and we have been catering to mommy and daddy.

 

[MiddleGround]

I have a problem with the way things were done PRE the IDEA and ADA laws- like segregating and sticking special ed kids in a basement corner of the building with windows, etc. Often, their civil rights were violated. Even putting them in their own school is discriminatory, because it is segregating. Every human being has civil rights, whether it is inconvenient or not. I think that a school's population benefits from students being able to see one another. I could see a wing devoted to the SpEd. There can be inclusive activities and electives, and not all SpEd students need to be separated out. ALL students can very much benefit from that. However, I also have a problem with sticking or lumping ALL SpEd students into the regular ed classrooms. That is not a perfect fit for all kids and does NOT fit in the spririt of the law where every student is entitled to a free and approprite edcuation in the LEAST RESTRICTIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR THEM. I think in the last decade at least we've gotten away from doing what is best for the student, and we have been catering to mommy and daddy.

What do you propose then? You say that you are for a special wing devoted to these children however, isn't that segregating them? What would be the ideal situation?

 

[Bann]

What do you propose then? You say that you are for a special wing devoted to these children however, isn't that segregating them? What would be the ideal situation?

There are too many variables to answer that question. My son is 28 years old and has been out of the public school system for 7 years, so I am not totally up on the current laws and various ways SpEd service delivery has changed or evolved.

A wing of the buidling that houses all the other students for whatever subjects, etc. is not secluding them like in the "old days" of relegating the retarded students to a basement corner of the building.

 

[Yooper]

There are too many variables to answer that question.

Exactly. The source as to why this is such a Gordian knot of a problem.

A wing of the buidling that houses all the other students for whatever subjects, etc. is not secluding them like in the "old days"....

I agree with you here, as well. "Mainstreaming" might just better be done by "side-streaming."

--- End of line (MCP)

 

[Bann]

Exactly. The source as to why this is such a Gordian knot of a problem.


I agree with you here, as well. "Mainstreaming" might just better be done by "side-streaming."

--- End of line (MCP)

I agree!

 

[MiddleGround]

There are too many variables to answer that question. My son is 28 years old and has been out of the public school system for 7 years, so I am not totally up on the current laws and various ways SpEd service delivery has changed or evolved.

A wing of the buidling that houses all the other students for whatever subjects, etc. is not secluding them like in the "old days" of relegating the retarded students to a basement corner of the building.

My point is that any situation that removes these kids from mainstrem classrooms is a form of segregation/seclusion for them. It is a quagmire simply because these children are different and require different methods of teaching. The only way to achieve this and not effect students that are in mainstream classrooms would be to segregate them and provide a learning environment that is appropriate so they can flourish. Common sense 101.

The moment when people realize this and put the children first and NOT their own agendas is the moment when SpEd kids will be able to thrive and learn.

 

[Bann]

My point is that any situation that removes these kids from mainstrem classrooms is a form of segregation/seclusion for them. It is a quagmire simply because these children are different and require different methods of teaching. The only way to achieve this and not effect students that are in mainstream classrooms would be to segregate them and provide a learning environment that is appropriate so they can flourish. Common sense 101.

The moment when people realize this and put the children first and NOT their own agendas is the moment when SpEd kids will be able to thrive and learn.

I think we're on the same point.

 

[BernieP]

I have 5 kids - 2 by adoption (both with special needs) and 3 by birth (2 have mild/moderate learning disabilities).

I do feel that kids with disabilities benefit from being with their typically developing peers - to learn appropriate social skills, some degree of parallel learning of academics, etc. And, typically developing kids do benefit from developing the empathy and compassion necessary to deal with disabled individuals. "Out of sight" leads to "out of mind" and doesn't promote the best outcomes for eventual inclusion of individuals with disabilities later in life. They don't just disappear as adults - most will need some sort of support to be productive members of society.

Now, before you roast me...

EXCELLENT POINT, part of the education is learning to interact with others.
Full disclosure, I guess I was a special needs kid. I have a disability that is fairly obvious, there was a two fold problem, (or more in my case).
First, my parents wanted to start me early, but my birthdate was a few days later than the cut off. I was teted, not only could I have started early, I could have skipped a grade and started in first. So after kindergarten, my parents sent me to a "special school" for two, maybe three years.
I learned what real disabilities were and how to respect those individuals.
The public schools or my era didn't have xerox machines, it was mimeograph machine - remember that ink smell
So there were no handouts in class, it was all note taking off the boards. If you had a vision problem, well, tough, sit closer.
There were no accommodations for anyone.

But my elementary school had two sets of special education classrooms. One set was almost self sufficient, they had their own bathrooms and outside play area (that was enclosed). They were more the extreme cases. The other set was people who we might call slow. For some reason, maybe because I was picked on because of my problem, or maybe because of my early exposure, I was not put off by either group. I didn't shy away from them. One of the teachers took notice and he bailed me out of problems both then and when I was a junior in HS. I won't tell you what I did, but he came forward in several cases and spoke the truth about the incident, which got me off the hook.

By I digress, if we don't mainstream in elementary school, when do we? When it's too late. At some point they become an adult, and have to deal with problems in the real world. They hae to cope. Isn't that what schools are about, giving children the tools to cope with the real world?

BTW, I wann't your typical disruption in class, I just had questions that maybe went beyond the scope of what the teacher had in mind for the class.
That and a slight problem with authority (I question). I also had an issue with anyone putting hands on me in a hostile manner - when I say "issue", I mean, I would take ISSUE with them.

 

[vraiblonde]

I understood us to be discussing kids who cannot, and will never be able to, adapt to a regular classroom and curriculum. As in, kids who have mental disabilities that cause them to become disruptive and aggressive (see the link in the first post). We're delving now into kids with simple learning problems, and of course they belong in the mainstream with extra help to get them on track. Kids with physical disabilities, same.

Asking questions or needing extra help is not the same as busting the place up.

 

[BernieP]

I understood us to be discussing kids who cannot, and will never be able to, adapt to a regular classroom and curriculum. As in, kids who have mental disabilities that cause them to become disruptive and aggressive (see the link in the first post). We're delving now into kids with simple learning problems, and of course they belong in the mainstream with extra help to get them on track. Kids with physical disabilities, same.

Asking questions or needing extra help is not the same as busting the place up.

Wrong, many can adapt, and it's a skillset they have to practice. Many are very intelligent, as one school use to say, they have learning differences.
They also need to develop the skill set to cope,.
You just don't go in and say my kid has a learning disablity. Kids are often tested because a teacher notices a problem in first grade.
To qualify as having a learning disability the student is given tests that are graded on what they can do, another test evalutes their potential, it's more of an IQ test. If the gap between the two tests is significant, they are considered to have a learning disability.
Sorry, they are not the dummies, that's why they can't be warehoused with kids who are "dummies" for lack of a better word.

 

[foxxynhounds]

Wrong, many can adapt, and it's a skillset they have to practice. Many are very intelligent, as one school use to say, they have learning differences.
They also need to develop the skill set to cope,.
You just don't go in and say my kid has a learning disablity. Kids are often tested because a teacher notices a problem in first grade.
To qualify as having a learning disability the student is given tests that are graded on what they can do, another test evalutes their potential, it's more of an IQ test. If the gap between the two tests is significant, they are considered to have a learning disability.
Sorry, they are not the dummies, that's why they can't be warehoused with kids who are "dummies" for lack of a better word.

Children with behavioral issues might be very intelligent - but that doesn't mean they should be mainstreamed. Children is school should NEVER have to worry about their safety - whether it be from gun violence or a peer. That's not conductive to learning for anyone - and I have BOTH types of children.

If a child has severe behavioral issues, then some sort of inclusion, when the child is best able to cope, should be planned for, and then gradually, and with appropriate supports, increase the inclusion IF the child can handle it. Doing so the other way around isn't doing anyone any good and certainly isn't helping the child in question a) learn academic material or b) build social relationships and skills.

 

[Bann]

Wrong, many can adapt, and it's a skillset they have to practice. Many are very intelligent, as one school use to say, they have learning differences.
They also need to develop the skill set to cope,.
You just don't go in and say my kid has a learning disablity. Kids are often tested because a teacher notices a problem in first grade.
To qualify as having a learning disability the student is given tests that are graded on what they can do, another test evalutes their potential, it's more of an IQ test. If the gap between the two tests is significant, they are considered to have a learning disability.

It's not quite that simple.

Sorry, they are not the dummies, that's why they can't be warehoused with kids who are "dummies" for lack of a better word.

I'm sure I'll be accused of being PC, but there are plenty of better words for "dummy". My son was in a classroom for kids who were intellectually disabled, but he is far from a dummy.

 

[acommondisaster]

When our low-functioning special needs daughter started school she was in a "special school". PT, OT, Speech Therapists, etc were all there to meet the needs of the students. It was a tight knit community with our own Parent/Teacher organization that could revolve around the needs of "our" kids. While my daughter was in grade school, the whole "inclusion" mandate started. She went from having the "run" of the school, independently walking to lunch, walking to the pool, being able to independently walk out to the bus, visiting other classrooms to being bussed to a "regular" school and being in a locked classroom. She was to "disruptive" to be allowed to walk to lunch (she'd clap and squeal and get overly happy). She virtually spent the rest of her days locked in classrooms for the rest of her days in school. Poor kid started having more tantrums, having to be dragged to the bus. The school's PTO's had nothing to offer "our" kids. Inclusion is not the right answer when the majority of special needs kids wind up in situations similar to what my daughter was put through.

 

[littlelady]

When our low-functioning special needs daughter started school she was in a "special school". PT, OT, Speech Therapists, etc were all there to meet the needs of the students. It was a tight knit community with our own Parent/Teacher organization that could revolve around the needs of "our" kids. While my daughter was in grade school, the whole "inclusion" mandate started. She went from having the "run" of the school, independently walking to lunch, walking to the pool, being able to independently walk out to the bus, visiting other classrooms to being bussed to a "regular" school and being in a locked classroom. She was to "disruptive" to be allowed to walk to lunch (she'd clap and squeal and get overly happy). She virtually spent the rest of her days locked in classrooms for the rest of her days in school. Poor kid started having more tantrums, having to be dragged to the bus. The school's PTO's had nothing to offer "our" kids. Inclusion is not the right answer when the majority of special needs kids wind up in situations similar to what my daughter was put through.

Being a mom is the hardest job in the World. Hope all worked out for your dot.

 

[sparkyaclown]

Frankly, my biggest issue with mainstreaming is that it is all about those parents and socializing their special needs kids . No one ever considers the other children in that classroom and what impact the disruptions have on their education. When I went to school, the special needs kids were in a separate classroom in the same school. They were able to interact with the main population during lunch/ recess which the in reality is the time to socialize. They had their own classroom structure more geared to them. The regular classroom is a place for learning and yet because of mainstreaming there are plenty of examples where a special needs child is in a classroom where it is impossible for them to ever grasp the concepts being taught but the teacher has to dedicate the extra time during class to accommodate whatever special request is outlined in their IEP and take away from what they can teach to the ones that can.

 

[vraiblonde]

Frankly, my biggest issue with mainstreaming is that it is all about those parents and socializing their special needs kids . No one ever considers the other children in that classroom and what impact the disruptions have on their education. When I went to school, the special needs kids were in a separate classroom in the same school. They were able to interact with the main population during lunch/ recess which the in reality is the time to socialize. They had their own classroom structure more geared to them. The regular classroom is a place for learning and yet because of mainstreaming there are plenty of examples where a special needs child is in a classroom where it is impossible for them to ever grasp the concepts being taught but the teacher has to dedicate the extra time during class to accommodate whatever special request is outlined in their IEP and take away from what they can teach to the ones that can.

I do think it's important to socialize SN kids and mainstream them on some level, but I agree with you that the classroom isn't the place to do it. It's a lose/lose for everyone involved.

 

[BernieP]

It's not quite that simple.
I'm sure I'll be accused of being PC, but there are plenty of better words for "dummy". My son was in a classroom for kids who were intellectually disabled, but he is far from a dummy.

I take that back, an IQ of 80 does not make you a stupid or dumb. An IQ below 80 you are starting to go into the intellectually challenged world.
I was trying to seperate explain how a learning disability is diagnosed and defined. By today's definition, Einstein would be learning disabled.
Dyslexia is one of the most misunderstood learning disabilities outside the medical community. There is no drug that can help, it's frustrating for the parent, the student and the teacher, because the only cure is long tedious hours of repetition. In the mean time the student is made fun of, gets failing grades but is very smart, often a higher IQ than the people teaching them. Other partents think the extra attention is stupid, because it's just that they read backwards. Which is wrong agian. Basically you are teaching the brain how to route signals through it's nueral network that is over wired, too many nueral synapses. Hence eduaction is more like what one would expect for rehabilitiation of a patient who had traumatic brain injury. What do you do with that child? It's not that they don't understand the subject, it's that they can't learn using traditional methods.
As for being disruptive in class, define disruptive. Is it the bored kid who only needs 10 minutes out of a 45 minute period to take a test, and score a 100 on that test. They are going to fidgit a bit, which could be seen as disruptive. Or talk (raises hand).

 

[Goldenhawk]

I've been watching this back-n-forth dialog. There are good points on both sides of the discussion. I would stipulate this: the real problem is the attempt to shoehorn thousands of students into a single system with a singular teaching style.

In essence, the problem begins when we turn over responsibility to a giant bureaucratic organization that inherently wants to minimize costs by putting everything into as few bins as possible. Mass-produce those minds, right?

I find it singularly ironic that the very proponents of today's "do it your way, have whatever kind of sex you want, identify as whatever race you want, it's not a baby it's a theyby until it decides its own gender" society somehow believe that shoving 100 kids with 90 different learning styles into a single classroom box is somehow appropriate.

I know not everyone can do it - Lord knows I couldn't - or afford it, but there's a lot to be said for homeschool - or at least private school with small classes and individualized attention and instruction.

 

[Toxick]

There was a glass-like wall between us and we were told to never go through the door.

Seriously? The image I'm getting in my head from this is, like a normal classroom with a glass enclosure with SpEd kids locked in it.


That sounds moderately ****ed up.

 

[MiddleGround]

I know not everyone can do it - Lord knows I couldn't - or afford it, but there's a lot to be said for homeschool - or at least private school with small classes and individualized attention and instruction.

I wouldn't necessarily say that private schooling is the "better" solution. I know quite a few graduates of the local private school system that are dumber than dried paint.