A friend posted this online and I thought that it was an excellent demonstration of the principle of listening to students. Mind you, it's a demonstration and in no way am I advocating teachers feeling as though they need to subject themselves - and their students - to a big long string of cuss words constantly. I think the point the teacher was trying to get across was that when students feel respected, they are far less likely to cuss and act badly. There is cussing in the video, but I thought it was well-done and helpful. How often have I as a parent been focused on the disrespect I've received from a child rather than the actual complaint? Let's just say that I don't always employ the "listening nicely and respectfully" method. Sorry. But I would like to do it more often.
Showing posts with label school discipline. Show all posts
Showing posts with label school discipline. Show all posts
02 August 2011
01 August 2011
Civil Rights.
Sure seems like schools want to keep the football team up-to-date with good equipment and dang straight they don't stop transporting the players to games. Gotta spend that money even if the economy is tanked. But disabled kids? Well, they don't perk up the "image" of the school, they rarely if ever go do anything noteworthy in life and really, it's just cheaper to lock them in a closet when they misbehave. I mean, who cares.
Those people don't really matter. Look at it this way: what choices do parents of severely disabled kids have? It's not like they're going anywhere else, and if they do, well, yay! Less money we have to spend. I mean, unless parents are rich and can afford an excellent private school that deals with the child's disability, they have to put up with what they can get from the school or give homeschooling a shot. And depending on the disability and the number of other kids at home, that's somewhere between difficult and impossible.
Yeah. I know I've said every parent can homeschool. And it's true. But get yourself oh, several different special needs all going on at once and honestly? You cannot homeschool *well.* You just can't. Sorry to bust that myth.
So, anyway. Captive audience there. Disabled kids are mostly stuck with whatever the school feeeels like doing. And if you try to sue 'em? Oh, you have to exhaust all "administrative remedies" before you can sue a district.
Translation: you have to beg these people. Document. Call lawyers. Spend YEARS allowing your child to be abused. And hope to hell you win. Otherwise? Nothing. Basically, your kid is nothing but a pawn in the game between parents and districts.
I know one mom who sued b/c her child was placed in the wrong program. He's autistic and they wanted to send him to a "behaviour" program. Um, exactly what the same district tried to pull with Elf. AT THE SAME TIME, we were both going through our own personal hells on the opposite ends of the same town. I guess it's cheaper just to lock the kid in the closet and nevermind a new program, even if more than one child would attend. This child is the same age as Elf. They might just be going to school together next year. I mean, the parallels are incredible.
His mom sued... and it took years... but they finally won, plus lawyer fees. Doesn't stop the district from pulling the same crap with the next parent. And the next parent. Not every mom has tens of thousands of dollars to spend on "free" education like this family. This child had to go to school for YEARS while all this was going on.
I couldn't do it. I just pulled my kid and homeschooled him. Maybe that is what they wanted. But it was all about what was best for Elf. Well... what was best for Elf THAT I COULD AFFORD.
And I look at stories like this and go, what on earth are we going to be saying about stuff like this 40 years from now. Really. What are we going to say?
Those people don't really matter. Look at it this way: what choices do parents of severely disabled kids have? It's not like they're going anywhere else, and if they do, well, yay! Less money we have to spend. I mean, unless parents are rich and can afford an excellent private school that deals with the child's disability, they have to put up with what they can get from the school or give homeschooling a shot. And depending on the disability and the number of other kids at home, that's somewhere between difficult and impossible.
Yeah. I know I've said every parent can homeschool. And it's true. But get yourself oh, several different special needs all going on at once and honestly? You cannot homeschool *well.* You just can't. Sorry to bust that myth.
So, anyway. Captive audience there. Disabled kids are mostly stuck with whatever the school feeeels like doing. And if you try to sue 'em? Oh, you have to exhaust all "administrative remedies" before you can sue a district.
Translation: you have to beg these people. Document. Call lawyers. Spend YEARS allowing your child to be abused. And hope to hell you win. Otherwise? Nothing. Basically, your kid is nothing but a pawn in the game between parents and districts.
I know one mom who sued b/c her child was placed in the wrong program. He's autistic and they wanted to send him to a "behaviour" program. Um, exactly what the same district tried to pull with Elf. AT THE SAME TIME, we were both going through our own personal hells on the opposite ends of the same town. I guess it's cheaper just to lock the kid in the closet and nevermind a new program, even if more than one child would attend. This child is the same age as Elf. They might just be going to school together next year. I mean, the parallels are incredible.
His mom sued... and it took years... but they finally won, plus lawyer fees. Doesn't stop the district from pulling the same crap with the next parent. And the next parent. Not every mom has tens of thousands of dollars to spend on "free" education like this family. This child had to go to school for YEARS while all this was going on.
I couldn't do it. I just pulled my kid and homeschooled him. Maybe that is what they wanted. But it was all about what was best for Elf. Well... what was best for Elf THAT I COULD AFFORD.
And I look at stories like this and go, what on earth are we going to be saying about stuff like this 40 years from now. Really. What are we going to say?
04 November 2010
Shriek and Shrill
Don't like rants? Don't read this.
I'm sooo tired of everyone this week. Here I read the election results and note that the Republicans won an auditor position locally. And I'm upset about about it. Yes. This guy LIED about his diplomas so badly that the college in question finally came out and said that he does not, either, have such a degree. I'm mad that the party can't somehow check these credentials, but at least they came out and gave this guy a big NO confidence vote before the election.
He still got elected.
I guess people are THAT MAD at Obama's agenda that they'll elect a patently unqualified lying slime to public office just because he has an R after his name. That'll show him. I'm sure Obama is crying about it tonight ("Boo hoo! NOT the county auditor position! I need the Situation Room, STAT!")
Hey. Our state voted in a DEAD GUY for Governor a few years back, so maybe I oughtn't be surprised.
Is it just me that thinks there's no "Democrat" or "Republican" way to add money? I admit I sometimes vote for Republicans because of the family values thing, but lying is just as bad as homosexual acts (if you read your Bible, you'd know this, my fellow voter).
And I'm disappointed that the Democrat running for state rep. didn't win. I don't agree with him about everything, but I think he was a good fella and was worthy of this position. His opponent sent out letters with the "this guy is a sell-out to the NEA and all your rights will be in the toilet if you vote for him" ideas spelled out almost as clearly as I've written 'em in the pretend quote.
Did he counter the Democrats' position on the NEA with any talk about how he's going to end spanking and locking children up in school? NO. He talked about how stinkin' proud he was to have his wife teach (at the SAME ELEMENTARY that locked Elf in a closet!).
Yay, boy. Not a way to get my vote. Not. I can't imagine his wife to be ignorant of what is going on there and by extension, I can't imagine him to be that ignorant, either. I know him personally. He's not stupid. Though I guess if you have to work, you have to work, and if you want to win elections, you need to get people scared about your political opponent. It's just a shame to see this because I didn't think he was a bad guy. Maybe I still don't. It just makes me sad to see.
I'm sooo tired of everyone this week. Here I read the election results and note that the Republicans won an auditor position locally. And I'm upset about about it. Yes. This guy LIED about his diplomas so badly that the college in question finally came out and said that he does not, either, have such a degree. I'm mad that the party can't somehow check these credentials, but at least they came out and gave this guy a big NO confidence vote before the election.
He still got elected.
I guess people are THAT MAD at Obama's agenda that they'll elect a patently unqualified lying slime to public office just because he has an R after his name. That'll show him. I'm sure Obama is crying about it tonight ("Boo hoo! NOT the county auditor position! I need the Situation Room, STAT!")
Hey. Our state voted in a DEAD GUY for Governor a few years back, so maybe I oughtn't be surprised.
Is it just me that thinks there's no "Democrat" or "Republican" way to add money? I admit I sometimes vote for Republicans because of the family values thing, but lying is just as bad as homosexual acts (if you read your Bible, you'd know this, my fellow voter).
And I'm disappointed that the Democrat running for state rep. didn't win. I don't agree with him about everything, but I think he was a good fella and was worthy of this position. His opponent sent out letters with the "this guy is a sell-out to the NEA and all your rights will be in the toilet if you vote for him" ideas spelled out almost as clearly as I've written 'em in the pretend quote.
Did he counter the Democrats' position on the NEA with any talk about how he's going to end spanking and locking children up in school? NO. He talked about how stinkin' proud he was to have his wife teach (at the SAME ELEMENTARY that locked Elf in a closet!).
Yay, boy. Not a way to get my vote. Not. I can't imagine his wife to be ignorant of what is going on there and by extension, I can't imagine him to be that ignorant, either. I know him personally. He's not stupid. Though I guess if you have to work, you have to work, and if you want to win elections, you need to get people scared about your political opponent. It's just a shame to see this because I didn't think he was a bad guy. Maybe I still don't. It just makes me sad to see.
25 October 2010
Teacher Bullying
Perhaps you're looking at the title and wondering whether this would be a post about teachers bullying children or the other way 'round. But it's about both!
I came across an interesting web article written about the problem of teacher bullying. From other places on the web, I gleaned that about 40 percent of elementary teachers admit to bullying on anonymous surveys. I'm not sure I buy this. (And this is not to blame teachers only. Please read on.) When we discuss "bullying" and "abuse," we usually outline it as something that ought never happen and don't discuss the more subtle, "acceptable" bullying and abuse that happens every day. The slight look. The following the letter of the law when it's known that the transgressor simply made a mistake. The favouritism we express for one person over another and the positive FEELINGS we have for one child are going to be felt by another. The other, less likeable child, is going to feel slighted no matter how well we think we're hiding those feelings. Maybe often we don't mean for smaller things like this to set up a bullying climate, but it can.
But clearly, when we have an easily-identifiable select group of teachers who are "the bullies" according to a good number of students... well... chances are that the teachers really are bullying in the classic sense of the word. I would not hesitate to add that they are likely unaware of it. The paper in question at no time discussed the more obvious bullying techniques of spanking, closet-locking and tying children up by teachers or staff, so I'm given to understand it's just the "look" and the mean or snide remark that can so devastate children that we're talking of here.
"In many schools – perhaps most schools – at least one or more teachers can be identified as abusive toward students. Students will be in substantial agreement about which teachers are high rate offenders. The same degree of agreement may hold true for the colleagues of these offenders. They too appear to know which colleagues are abusive. The public nature of bullying patterns increases the likelihood of consensus on those who are most extreme in their behaviors. Simply stated, the faculty and students within the institution often are in private agreement about who the few culprits are, and express deep frustration at feeling powerless to stop the problematic behavior.
"Those who bully students are not likely to be new teachers. Teachers who bully tend to be established and secure in their positions (taught five or more years). The reasons for this are not yet clear."
If I may hazard a guess, burnout is only one possible consideration. Another is that older teachers may have less training in how to deal with the disabled children who ARE being mainstreamed through school. Certainly the teacher who was unable to handle my son was three years from retirement. There were many students who absolutely loved her. And she was a good teacher... of neurotypical students without "discipline" or behaviour issues. If you read the article I linked, you'll see that often there are students who are the "targets," and no one will defend them because they really WERE kinda bratty or naughty. Who wants to go up to bat for someone who is perceived to be not-so-innocent?
When we talk about "safe schools," though, I think we should also be talking about ways to make the teachers feel safe. I think the young lady with the white beret and sarcastic talk is perfectly within her rights to say what she feels, even if it's a bit mean and unkind... but some of the other videos linked here are disturbing! If I were a teacher, and some children were destroying effigies of me on youtube, I don't think I'd be wanting to teach them in class the next day. I don't know how teachers negotiate their contracts or what THEY feel would be reasonable expectations of privacy and safety (so I can't particularly comment on how to "fix" this) ... but I don't think I could teach some of these kids. At all.
And can I say that some of the comments about this being just kids getting their anger out are also disturbing? Expressing your anger in a public place like that is just NOT ok. Punch a pillow at home and don't let others hear about it. Good grief. NOT ok, you guys.
I came across an interesting web article written about the problem of teacher bullying. From other places on the web, I gleaned that about 40 percent of elementary teachers admit to bullying on anonymous surveys. I'm not sure I buy this. (And this is not to blame teachers only. Please read on.) When we discuss "bullying" and "abuse," we usually outline it as something that ought never happen and don't discuss the more subtle, "acceptable" bullying and abuse that happens every day. The slight look. The following the letter of the law when it's known that the transgressor simply made a mistake. The favouritism we express for one person over another and the positive FEELINGS we have for one child are going to be felt by another. The other, less likeable child, is going to feel slighted no matter how well we think we're hiding those feelings. Maybe often we don't mean for smaller things like this to set up a bullying climate, but it can.
But clearly, when we have an easily-identifiable select group of teachers who are "the bullies" according to a good number of students... well... chances are that the teachers really are bullying in the classic sense of the word. I would not hesitate to add that they are likely unaware of it. The paper in question at no time discussed the more obvious bullying techniques of spanking, closet-locking and tying children up by teachers or staff, so I'm given to understand it's just the "look" and the mean or snide remark that can so devastate children that we're talking of here.
"In many schools – perhaps most schools – at least one or more teachers can be identified as abusive toward students. Students will be in substantial agreement about which teachers are high rate offenders. The same degree of agreement may hold true for the colleagues of these offenders. They too appear to know which colleagues are abusive. The public nature of bullying patterns increases the likelihood of consensus on those who are most extreme in their behaviors. Simply stated, the faculty and students within the institution often are in private agreement about who the few culprits are, and express deep frustration at feeling powerless to stop the problematic behavior.
"Those who bully students are not likely to be new teachers. Teachers who bully tend to be established and secure in their positions (taught five or more years). The reasons for this are not yet clear."
If I may hazard a guess, burnout is only one possible consideration. Another is that older teachers may have less training in how to deal with the disabled children who ARE being mainstreamed through school. Certainly the teacher who was unable to handle my son was three years from retirement. There were many students who absolutely loved her. And she was a good teacher... of neurotypical students without "discipline" or behaviour issues. If you read the article I linked, you'll see that often there are students who are the "targets," and no one will defend them because they really WERE kinda bratty or naughty. Who wants to go up to bat for someone who is perceived to be not-so-innocent?
When we talk about "safe schools," though, I think we should also be talking about ways to make the teachers feel safe. I think the young lady with the white beret and sarcastic talk is perfectly within her rights to say what she feels, even if it's a bit mean and unkind... but some of the other videos linked here are disturbing! If I were a teacher, and some children were destroying effigies of me on youtube, I don't think I'd be wanting to teach them in class the next day. I don't know how teachers negotiate their contracts or what THEY feel would be reasonable expectations of privacy and safety (so I can't particularly comment on how to "fix" this) ... but I don't think I could teach some of these kids. At all.
And can I say that some of the comments about this being just kids getting their anger out are also disturbing? Expressing your anger in a public place like that is just NOT ok. Punch a pillow at home and don't let others hear about it. Good grief. NOT ok, you guys.
02 July 2010
YOU Can Prevent Abuse at School
I think we all know there are some things that are wrong, no matter what the law says. Used to be you could legally buy and sell slaves at the courthouse up the street from me. Today, it's legal for certified teachers to lock children into closets. Our local high school even has paddling procedures outlined. As long as they avoid the face and hands, it's legally OK when a teacher treats a child this way.
But it's no way to treat a human being.
I've contacting you in regards to SB 2860, a bill that would reduce the incidences of restraint and seclusion in public schools. Sad to say, but we need a bill that will give children the same rights that prisoners and mental health patients take for granted.
I have a three-year-old who was diagnosed yesterday with severe autism, and I'd like to be able to send him to school when he is older. But I might not be able to do that in good conscience without your help.
The preschool is wonderful in this district, but the elementaries have a nasty practice of locking children in closets when they "misbehave." My older son Elf is autistic and at the age of six would hide under the desk and that sort of thing when he felt overwhelmed. Rather than figure out a way to meet his needs, they set up a confrontation and would drag him to a locked closet for noncompliance. This made the problem behaviours at school worse.
I have been homeschooling him for nearly four years now, and I can tell you that a smaller class would have been perfect for him. He doesn't receive any special services; he just needed a calmer environment without the threat of physical violence.
Needless to say, I have not felt the need to lock my child in a cement closet during his schooling at home. Surely if an untrained parent can figure out how to not abuse a child, our teachers should be required to purchase a clue about how to treat people humanely.
Elf is now ten and afraid of "school." He wants to wear his homeschool shirts all the time so that no one will think he is truant and take him away. What he has been through has affected his perception of who "safe people" are and the nature of people in the helping professions. I'd sure like to spare my younger son these sorts of phobias. I don't really want to homeschool a non-verbal child, but I CANNOT put him somewhere I think he will be abused... let alone into a place where he will be abused and I have no legal recourse.
Can you help? It would be so much appreciated.
Most sincerely,
Mrs. C's real name
***
That was my note to MO Senator Claire McCaskill.
My dear readers, will you do something for me? Will you contact your state senator and advocate for the passage of SB 2860? It simply mandates the same level of protection for schoolchildren that someone in, say, a hospital or other public place would have against being shoved into closets, tied to chairs, and sat upon. It DOES NOT prevent necessary force, any more than it prevents security from doing something to you if you acted up in the emergency room. It just makes what teachers can do and can't do clearer. It will help children in states like mine that give teachers and administrators total leeway to lock the more difficult to educate (read: disabled) children into closets and otherwise not provide them with the free public education to which they are entitled.
I'll celebrate when this law is passed, and then I'll circle 'round about the blogs when I catch wind of something that will prevent the heinous practice of paddling in schools. It should never be ok to abuse a child. Please help by contacting your senator. Want to find out more? Here's a link to get started.
But it's no way to treat a human being.
I've contacting you in regards to SB 2860, a bill that would reduce the incidences of restraint and seclusion in public schools. Sad to say, but we need a bill that will give children the same rights that prisoners and mental health patients take for granted.
I have a three-year-old who was diagnosed yesterday with severe autism, and I'd like to be able to send him to school when he is older. But I might not be able to do that in good conscience without your help.
The preschool is wonderful in this district, but the elementaries have a nasty practice of locking children in closets when they "misbehave." My older son Elf is autistic and at the age of six would hide under the desk and that sort of thing when he felt overwhelmed. Rather than figure out a way to meet his needs, they set up a confrontation and would drag him to a locked closet for noncompliance. This made the problem behaviours at school worse.
I have been homeschooling him for nearly four years now, and I can tell you that a smaller class would have been perfect for him. He doesn't receive any special services; he just needed a calmer environment without the threat of physical violence.
Needless to say, I have not felt the need to lock my child in a cement closet during his schooling at home. Surely if an untrained parent can figure out how to not abuse a child, our teachers should be required to purchase a clue about how to treat people humanely.
Elf is now ten and afraid of "school." He wants to wear his homeschool shirts all the time so that no one will think he is truant and take him away. What he has been through has affected his perception of who "safe people" are and the nature of people in the helping professions. I'd sure like to spare my younger son these sorts of phobias. I don't really want to homeschool a non-verbal child, but I CANNOT put him somewhere I think he will be abused... let alone into a place where he will be abused and I have no legal recourse.
Can you help? It would be so much appreciated.
Most sincerely,
Mrs. C's real name
***
That was my note to MO Senator Claire McCaskill.
My dear readers, will you do something for me? Will you contact your state senator and advocate for the passage of SB 2860? It simply mandates the same level of protection for schoolchildren that someone in, say, a hospital or other public place would have against being shoved into closets, tied to chairs, and sat upon. It DOES NOT prevent necessary force, any more than it prevents security from doing something to you if you acted up in the emergency room. It just makes what teachers can do and can't do clearer. It will help children in states like mine that give teachers and administrators total leeway to lock the more difficult to educate (read: disabled) children into closets and otherwise not provide them with the free public education to which they are entitled.
I'll celebrate when this law is passed, and then I'll circle 'round about the blogs when I catch wind of something that will prevent the heinous practice of paddling in schools. It should never be ok to abuse a child. Please help by contacting your senator. Want to find out more? Here's a link to get started.
27 May 2010
School Bullying: A Tragic Cost of Forced Schooling and Autocratic School Governance
Now, you might expect a headline like that on some of the homeschoolio blogs. Maybe on some of the ultra-liberal or ultra-conservative websites. But this one? Was on Psychology Today. And written by an "evolutionary psychologist," of all things. Excerpt:
"Bullying occurs regularly when people who have no political power and are ruled in top-down fashion by others are required by law or economic necessity to remain in that setting. It occurs regularly, for example, in prisons. Those who are bullied can't escape, and they have no legislative or judicial power to confront the bullies. They may report bullying to the prison guards and warden, but the guards and warden may not know whom to believe and may have greater vested interest in hiding bullying than in publicizing it and dealing with it openly."
The solution? Give the students power so they feel all, like, empowered. Like that's gonna happen. I'm thinking it would be an interesting school atmosphere if the nerds in Student Council had some real power.
They could TELL the cafeteria what it's serving (hint: Pizza. Every day. No veggies. All meals come with cookies.) and TELL the school that yes, everyone with a license can drive to school and no, you're not charging for parking and guess what? We can park off-campus, too, and there is nothing you can do to enforce that. Oh... and we can leave if we don't feel like attending class once we pass our freshman year. As long as we keep a C average and have a parent permission letter signed, it's open campus, baybee...
Why not?
Some sort of balance of power would be nice. But like I said... not gonna happen. In fact, I'm reading over at Spunky's that even babies are now considered trackable as students. It really bums me out, if for no other reason that homeschoolers can't snarkily quip that with lowering compulsory attendance ages, soon the government will want to snatch our kids when we leave the hospital. Bummer. That's not a funny joke anymore. Not. Funny. Any. More. At all.
But back to bullying. In all seriousness, the school can't stop all forms of bullying. It probably wouldn't be a healthy thing if they could if by "bullying," you're including "I think you are a dork and/or your idea is stupid" sorts of discussions with other students. But direct threats and violence are things that need to stop.
Look at this video from the Bully Project. I suppose I should be furious at the school for allowing this to continue, but WHAT ABOUT THE PARENTS? What on earth are they thinking, sending their kid back to that? Wouldn't you rather hide him in the basement, say he moved away or do ANYTHING before you'd send him back to that? What on earth?? This poor child needs protection.
Forget homeschooling for just a sec here. Treatment like that demands parents violate compulsory attendance laws if they have to. He can learn his algebra later... but this is just not ok.
One interesting anti-bullying idea I came across was to have the little tykes narc on their bully classmates. That's right. The teachers gather the rat-out sheets and compile the "top ten" lists of accused "bullies." Then they act all surprised when some of the parents think their little snowflake can do no wrong. (Maybe that's because unsubstantiated claims like that... leading to labelling a child... IS very wrong. Or maybe it's because their kid really is a little tyrant if 98 out of 100 kids listed his name, but I'm thinking innocent until proven guilty is sorta good policy.)
I don't pretend to have all the answers. I do know schools are in a very tough position. I do agree that schools should be safe places where kids can learn. But what Megan McSillie is posting to her facebook account at 4 pm shouldn't have anything to do with school unless there is some direct threat. Then get the cops involved.
Beyond that, I'm not sure what the answer is. I remember junior high as being the worst time of my life. Looking back, there are some things that 40-year-old me would so not care about. But 13-year-old me? Was devastated about some of the insults and nastiness I encountered. I'm glad that part of my life is over. :)
"Bullying occurs regularly when people who have no political power and are ruled in top-down fashion by others are required by law or economic necessity to remain in that setting. It occurs regularly, for example, in prisons. Those who are bullied can't escape, and they have no legislative or judicial power to confront the bullies. They may report bullying to the prison guards and warden, but the guards and warden may not know whom to believe and may have greater vested interest in hiding bullying than in publicizing it and dealing with it openly."
The solution? Give the students power so they feel all, like, empowered. Like that's gonna happen. I'm thinking it would be an interesting school atmosphere if the nerds in Student Council had some real power.
They could TELL the cafeteria what it's serving (hint: Pizza. Every day. No veggies. All meals come with cookies.) and TELL the school that yes, everyone with a license can drive to school and no, you're not charging for parking and guess what? We can park off-campus, too, and there is nothing you can do to enforce that. Oh... and we can leave if we don't feel like attending class once we pass our freshman year. As long as we keep a C average and have a parent permission letter signed, it's open campus, baybee...
Why not?
Some sort of balance of power would be nice. But like I said... not gonna happen. In fact, I'm reading over at Spunky's that even babies are now considered trackable as students. It really bums me out, if for no other reason that homeschoolers can't snarkily quip that with lowering compulsory attendance ages, soon the government will want to snatch our kids when we leave the hospital. Bummer. That's not a funny joke anymore. Not. Funny. Any. More. At all.
But back to bullying. In all seriousness, the school can't stop all forms of bullying. It probably wouldn't be a healthy thing if they could if by "bullying," you're including "I think you are a dork and/or your idea is stupid" sorts of discussions with other students. But direct threats and violence are things that need to stop.
Look at this video from the Bully Project. I suppose I should be furious at the school for allowing this to continue, but WHAT ABOUT THE PARENTS? What on earth are they thinking, sending their kid back to that? Wouldn't you rather hide him in the basement, say he moved away or do ANYTHING before you'd send him back to that? What on earth?? This poor child needs protection.
Forget homeschooling for just a sec here. Treatment like that demands parents violate compulsory attendance laws if they have to. He can learn his algebra later... but this is just not ok.
One interesting anti-bullying idea I came across was to have the little tykes narc on their bully classmates. That's right. The teachers gather the rat-out sheets and compile the "top ten" lists of accused "bullies." Then they act all surprised when some of the parents think their little snowflake can do no wrong. (Maybe that's because unsubstantiated claims like that... leading to labelling a child... IS very wrong. Or maybe it's because their kid really is a little tyrant if 98 out of 100 kids listed his name, but I'm thinking innocent until proven guilty is sorta good policy.)
I don't pretend to have all the answers. I do know schools are in a very tough position. I do agree that schools should be safe places where kids can learn. But what Megan McSillie is posting to her facebook account at 4 pm shouldn't have anything to do with school unless there is some direct threat. Then get the cops involved.
Beyond that, I'm not sure what the answer is. I remember junior high as being the worst time of my life. Looking back, there are some things that 40-year-old me would so not care about. But 13-year-old me? Was devastated about some of the insults and nastiness I encountered. I'm glad that part of my life is over. :)
25 May 2010
Wearing the Rosary in School?
So this kid wore a rosary to school, and the principal wants us to know that violated an unwritten school rule. Young Jason Laguna "endangered the safety, health, morals or welfare of himself or others" by being a Jesus Freak, Catholic style in class. (Hat tip: nightfly)
I've got to be honest with you here: most of my family is Catholic, but I don't really "get" a lot of these traditions because I wasn't raised learning the catechism and attending mass. But see, if I were the principal of a school where people were starting to wear the Rosary, I'd have to get some basics down about it so I could see whether this is a central thing or just a religious trapping along the lines of virginity bracelets or purity rings are for some Protestants. (Their rights are hardly violated if you were to ask them to remove these things during school hours, I think.)
And it's pretty central if several popes say it is (from a cursory glance at the ol' wikipedia):
"Most recently, on May 3, 2008, Pope Benedict XVI stated that the Rosary is experiencing a new springtime: 'It is one of the most eloquent signs of love that the young generation nourish for Jesus and his Mother.'[4] To Benedict XVI, the rosary is a meditation on all important moments of salvation history.[4] Before him, Pope John Paul II's Apostolic Letter Rosarium Virginis Mariae[5] built on the 'total Marian devotion' pioneered by Saint Louis de Montfort. Pope Pius XII and his successors actively promoted the veneration of the Virgin in Lourdes and Fatima, which is credited with a new resurgence of the rosary within the Catholic Church.[6]"
I don't doubt that gangs CAN use the rosary as some sort of identifier, just like they could use the colour purple with green dots if they wanted to. All those Barney fans in public school would just have to lump it, because it's perfectly reasonable for the school to put dress code rules into place. I myself am a bit suspicious of any show with unsupervised children and characters like "BJ" running around to begin with, so a Barney ban would probably be ok with me.
But seriously. They're going to suspend the kid for this? From the comments:
"This altar boy should know that the rosary is never to be used for jewelry or adornment. The kid himself said he wore it because it looked cool and not, it seems, for any misguided religious reason. It is true that the rosary has been hijacked in some areas as a gang sign and if that is the case in this area then notification should have been sent out warning kids and parents of that and other "signs" that might be misconstrued and therefore prohibited."
Ok... The American flag is never to be worn as clothing, technically, but we've all seen that happening in schools as well. We can't get all up into people's inner motives for wearing the flag or the rosary or anything else. The question is whether each article in question would be allowable under the umbrellas of general personal freedom or religious freedom (your pick). Sometimes they aren't.
I think we all "get" that we give up some of our "freedoms" when we go to public school. During the orchestra trip to China, it has been expressly stated that the 18-year-olds are NOT to purchase or consume alcohol at any time while they are away. It doesn't matter if it's legal there. If you want to go on this trip, you'll abide by the rules. Fair enough. But when we MUST be educated and we MUST (for whatever reason if we can't home/private school) send our children to public school, I believe the school and the parent and the student ought work together to be as reasonable as possible about things.
That means my children can't wear their tank tops to school. It's ok. But I hope they let this young man wear his rosary. He's still figuring himself out, figuring where he stands on everything to begin with. I think we should all give him the chance to do that.
I've got to be honest with you here: most of my family is Catholic, but I don't really "get" a lot of these traditions because I wasn't raised learning the catechism and attending mass. But see, if I were the principal of a school where people were starting to wear the Rosary, I'd have to get some basics down about it so I could see whether this is a central thing or just a religious trapping along the lines of virginity bracelets or purity rings are for some Protestants. (Their rights are hardly violated if you were to ask them to remove these things during school hours, I think.)
And it's pretty central if several popes say it is (from a cursory glance at the ol' wikipedia):
"Most recently, on May 3, 2008, Pope Benedict XVI stated that the Rosary is experiencing a new springtime: 'It is one of the most eloquent signs of love that the young generation nourish for Jesus and his Mother.'[4] To Benedict XVI, the rosary is a meditation on all important moments of salvation history.[4] Before him, Pope John Paul II's Apostolic Letter Rosarium Virginis Mariae[5] built on the 'total Marian devotion' pioneered by Saint Louis de Montfort. Pope Pius XII and his successors actively promoted the veneration of the Virgin in Lourdes and Fatima, which is credited with a new resurgence of the rosary within the Catholic Church.[6]"
I don't doubt that gangs CAN use the rosary as some sort of identifier, just like they could use the colour purple with green dots if they wanted to. All those Barney fans in public school would just have to lump it, because it's perfectly reasonable for the school to put dress code rules into place. I myself am a bit suspicious of any show with unsupervised children and characters like "BJ" running around to begin with, so a Barney ban would probably be ok with me.
But seriously. They're going to suspend the kid for this? From the comments:
"This altar boy should know that the rosary is never to be used for jewelry or adornment. The kid himself said he wore it because it looked cool and not, it seems, for any misguided religious reason. It is true that the rosary has been hijacked in some areas as a gang sign and if that is the case in this area then notification should have been sent out warning kids and parents of that and other "signs" that might be misconstrued and therefore prohibited."
Ok... The American flag is never to be worn as clothing, technically, but we've all seen that happening in schools as well. We can't get all up into people's inner motives for wearing the flag or the rosary or anything else. The question is whether each article in question would be allowable under the umbrellas of general personal freedom or religious freedom (your pick). Sometimes they aren't.
I think we all "get" that we give up some of our "freedoms" when we go to public school. During the orchestra trip to China, it has been expressly stated that the 18-year-olds are NOT to purchase or consume alcohol at any time while they are away. It doesn't matter if it's legal there. If you want to go on this trip, you'll abide by the rules. Fair enough. But when we MUST be educated and we MUST (for whatever reason if we can't home/private school) send our children to public school, I believe the school and the parent and the student ought work together to be as reasonable as possible about things.
That means my children can't wear their tank tops to school. It's ok. But I hope they let this young man wear his rosary. He's still figuring himself out, figuring where he stands on everything to begin with. I think we should all give him the chance to do that.
07 May 2010
Paddling at the Workplace
Just because an idea is old doesn't mean it isn't a goodie. Paddling people who are disrespectful or belligerent during work hours should get 'em a swack, just like in the old days.
Made-up person James Millington had a lot of trouble keeping order at the workplace until he got a wooden paddle and swacked his disrespectful employees hard enough to knock some sense into them.
Then he recruited an old lady who was the victim of workplace violence to speak out in favour of his idea. He convinced her to think that if she were able to swack a few workers around with the paddle, that none of the workers would retaliate or act out negatively in other ways.
"Workers these days," she says as her entire old body shakes feebly, "They just don't have the respect for authority they used to and t'aint that a shaame..."
Millington himself is starting a website about what a great idea this is and how psychological theory (somehow) proves his point. He's pitching his idea to the board of directors, and he already has a few onboard.
Ok, seriously... I know children who attend school and adults who work are two different things. I know children need to be taught a lesson every now and then, but I also don't think that this is going to inspire children to grow up to be kind and gentle people. I would say, "What would Jesus do?" but some of my fellow Christian friends seem to think that Jesus would go around with a modified cricket bat like these teachers. How about we think about, "What would Mr. Rogers do?" instead. Honestly, I think Jesus and Mr. Rogers would do the same thing. They'd model humility and servanthood. Children WANT to be loved and appreciated. No, they're not always good. But so, so, SO much of what they become is based on what they see modelled and prayed over them.
And yes, there comes a time to give a child a suspension or to call his parents. But just as the threat of a paddle isn't going to make a worker create a better blueprint on time, it also isn't going to make little Joey sit still in class and pay attention if your lecture is plain old boring and stupid and if he knows you don't truly care for him.
Just saying.
19 December 2009
Cue the "Evil" Music
The NEA bursts forth onto the national scene to remind us all that they're really, really GLAD that there is a proposed bill restricting the use of restraint and seclusion in schools. They're really, really glad. No, really. And they've been working a long time with disability groups and stuff and are heralding this great step forward blah blah blah and et cetera.
Have you puked yet? I'm kinda getting the angry dry heaves coming on here. When was the last time they have "advocated" for any teacher who slaps, restrains, secludes and/or otherwise abuses a student to be FIRED ON THE SPOT? Hmm? You just wow me with that overwhelming evidence *right now* and maybe we'll talk about how sincere this press release really is. Cue the "evil" music:
“We must work together to ensure the safety of all students and educators and create supports that provide proper training for school staff,” states NEA President Dennis Van Roekel.
Yeah.
Is this the same "working together" on common educational goals that the staff at my son's elementary wanted to do when they continually refused to provide a one-to-one aide, preferring instead to seclude him in a closet for his "manipulative" behaviour? I'm just wondering.
Maybe I need to stop being so cynical. Maybe we really DO need to work together. But I'd sure like a little more power on my side of the "bargaining" table when we're doing that. Is the union just giving in on this because it knows some of its members are abusers and need clear guidelines so they don't make the union look worse than it already does? I'm just trying to think of what it is about this bill that would make it in the teachers' union's best interest. More money for training/ higher pay for "qualified" disability teachers? That's a compromise I could certainly live with if it means that children's civil rights are respected.
What's your take? Am I just casting the NEA as the villain in every act of every play? Could they actually just get around to doing something right for a change, because they made a mistake and did something nice that would benefit a non-union member? (Gasp! LOL)
Or... wait. Wait. Don't tell me. It's political/liberal stuff, right? Is treating kids with respect a "liberal" thing now? "They" own that? Maybe that's it. Um... the more I think about it, the more I think probably that's it. At least on paper, "they" at least know we need to be nice to people. It's a pity more can't be said about conservative leaders who advocate swatting with belts as a logical consequence for common misbehaviours.
Um... and that's the moderate conservative. The extremists advocate absolute parental freedoms and all (you know, parents "free" to abuse their kids with no repercussions because God put 'em in the family, so God must like what's going on). These folks also think schoolteachers shouldn't do that, though... because there shouldn't BE any teachers outside Sunday School if y'all are being GOOD parents and homeschooling, right?? Though if it happens in Sunday School, that's ok because of some verse in Romans 13 about the powers that be being ordained by God, so shut up if the Sunday School teacher slaps your kid...
Siiiiiigh... Or worse yet, on another blog I read about how it is ALL YOUR FAULT, Mom, if your child is sexually abused in church because of some verse in Deuteronomy. And um, the verse means that you have to keep your kid with you at all times until she is married. If anything bad happens, you are 100% responsible (not the abuser; you've just placed "temptation" in his way with that hot 7-year-old of yours and her wily ways... *barf*) because you did not tomato-stake her properly.
I'm not going to link to the extreme stuff because it's so brainless and authoritarian that any good Christian should resist it. (Really. Read Galatians sometime. It's ok to think for yourself and figure out what the Pharisees don't want you to know about grace. And I am beginning to suspect that some legalism is a cover for very sinful behaviour; that of CONTROLLING OTHER PEOPLE, whether what they're advocating is right or not.
And MOST Christians don't buy it; they really don't. Please don't confuse "I agree with you that families are important" with "I agree that parents should be able to swat their kids with paddles until they bruise and gay people should be burnt at the stake." There's kind of a jump in logic that the simple questions of, "Do you support traditional marriage?" and "Do you think gay marriage is ok?" are not going to tease out... a jump in logic that differentiates most Christians from people like Fred Phelps.
Though maybe that is NOT a jump in logic if you find gay sex to be an absolute right akin to beating your kid senseless with a paddle. (!!??) Nothing really makes sense to me... no one's viewpoint really seems to be consistent on everything, including my own. That line between freedom and responsibility to others can be very tricky to draw indeed.
I tell you, the world is a topsy-turvy place sometimes. Sometimes, the people we think are evil don't turn out to be *wholly* evil... and the people we think are our allies? Well, you need to look out for them because you just never know, friend, what tomorrow may bring.
I am ready for the NEA to do something right. I'm ready for it to earn my admiration and respect, even. I'm going to try to keep an open mind on things.
But even as I tried to contact my congressman about this issue, I couldn't categorize it properly under "Civil Rights." The fellow had NO "Civil Rights" button, but there were about fourteen different words for "abortion" (pro-life, abortion, etc.) and tea party protest/ tax helps. I hope that doesn't mean that civil rights aren't important to him and that he wants five times as many comments about tax reform than education. Just an oversight? Will he listen?
I have a lot of questions about everything.
Have you puked yet? I'm kinda getting the angry dry heaves coming on here. When was the last time they have "advocated" for any teacher who slaps, restrains, secludes and/or otherwise abuses a student to be FIRED ON THE SPOT? Hmm? You just wow me with that overwhelming evidence *right now* and maybe we'll talk about how sincere this press release really is. Cue the "evil" music:
“We must work together to ensure the safety of all students and educators and create supports that provide proper training for school staff,” states NEA President Dennis Van Roekel.
Yeah.
Is this the same "working together" on common educational goals that the staff at my son's elementary wanted to do when they continually refused to provide a one-to-one aide, preferring instead to seclude him in a closet for his "manipulative" behaviour? I'm just wondering.
Maybe I need to stop being so cynical. Maybe we really DO need to work together. But I'd sure like a little more power on my side of the "bargaining" table when we're doing that. Is the union just giving in on this because it knows some of its members are abusers and need clear guidelines so they don't make the union look worse than it already does? I'm just trying to think of what it is about this bill that would make it in the teachers' union's best interest. More money for training/ higher pay for "qualified" disability teachers? That's a compromise I could certainly live with if it means that children's civil rights are respected.
What's your take? Am I just casting the NEA as the villain in every act of every play? Could they actually just get around to doing something right for a change, because they made a mistake and did something nice that would benefit a non-union member? (Gasp! LOL)
Or... wait. Wait. Don't tell me. It's political/liberal stuff, right? Is treating kids with respect a "liberal" thing now? "They" own that? Maybe that's it. Um... the more I think about it, the more I think probably that's it. At least on paper, "they" at least know we need to be nice to people. It's a pity more can't be said about conservative leaders who advocate swatting with belts as a logical consequence for common misbehaviours.
Um... and that's the moderate conservative. The extremists advocate absolute parental freedoms and all (you know, parents "free" to abuse their kids with no repercussions because God put 'em in the family, so God must like what's going on). These folks also think schoolteachers shouldn't do that, though... because there shouldn't BE any teachers outside Sunday School if y'all are being GOOD parents and homeschooling, right?? Though if it happens in Sunday School, that's ok because of some verse in Romans 13 about the powers that be being ordained by God, so shut up if the Sunday School teacher slaps your kid...
Siiiiiigh... Or worse yet, on another blog I read about how it is ALL YOUR FAULT, Mom, if your child is sexually abused in church because of some verse in Deuteronomy. And um, the verse means that you have to keep your kid with you at all times until she is married. If anything bad happens, you are 100% responsible (not the abuser; you've just placed "temptation" in his way with that hot 7-year-old of yours and her wily ways... *barf*) because you did not tomato-stake her properly.
I'm not going to link to the extreme stuff because it's so brainless and authoritarian that any good Christian should resist it. (Really. Read Galatians sometime. It's ok to think for yourself and figure out what the Pharisees don't want you to know about grace. And I am beginning to suspect that some legalism is a cover for very sinful behaviour; that of CONTROLLING OTHER PEOPLE, whether what they're advocating is right or not.
And MOST Christians don't buy it; they really don't. Please don't confuse "I agree with you that families are important" with "I agree that parents should be able to swat their kids with paddles until they bruise and gay people should be burnt at the stake." There's kind of a jump in logic that the simple questions of, "Do you support traditional marriage?" and "Do you think gay marriage is ok?" are not going to tease out... a jump in logic that differentiates most Christians from people like Fred Phelps.
Though maybe that is NOT a jump in logic if you find gay sex to be an absolute right akin to beating your kid senseless with a paddle. (!!??) Nothing really makes sense to me... no one's viewpoint really seems to be consistent on everything, including my own. That line between freedom and responsibility to others can be very tricky to draw indeed.
I tell you, the world is a topsy-turvy place sometimes. Sometimes, the people we think are evil don't turn out to be *wholly* evil... and the people we think are our allies? Well, you need to look out for them because you just never know, friend, what tomorrow may bring.
I am ready for the NEA to do something right. I'm ready for it to earn my admiration and respect, even. I'm going to try to keep an open mind on things.
But even as I tried to contact my congressman about this issue, I couldn't categorize it properly under "Civil Rights." The fellow had NO "Civil Rights" button, but there were about fourteen different words for "abortion" (pro-life, abortion, etc.) and tea party protest/ tax helps. I hope that doesn't mean that civil rights aren't important to him and that he wants five times as many comments about tax reform than education. Just an oversight? Will he listen?
I have a lot of questions about everything.
10 December 2009
Proposed Law!
Dare I hope? It ends restraint in public schools and gives guidelines limiting the use of seclusion rooms. Ange is currently in Washington, advocating. BIG hats off to her, because what she's doing is so important. I got the link to the legislation from her blog and want to pass the word on to you.
Will you pray? Will you call your senator when this gets up for a vote? This is big stuff, folks.
And dare I say it? The Obama administration is taking some steps we never saw under Bush. And Senator Dodd of CT, big thanks to him as well. I very much wish that we had some more conservative folks who would "get" that abuse in school is not ok.
Will you pray? Will you call your senator when this gets up for a vote? This is big stuff, folks.
And dare I say it? The Obama administration is taking some steps we never saw under Bush. And Senator Dodd of CT, big thanks to him as well. I very much wish that we had some more conservative folks who would "get" that abuse in school is not ok.
13 June 2009
Is This Progress?
No, really. I'm not sure. Story here.
Missouri school districts will be required to draft policies regarding the use of "safe"or "recovery" rooms. The legislators in Missouri were at first thinking about using their heads and eliminating this, ahem, "option" for districts altogether, but then many parents called up and just begged them, PLEASE not to take this ability away from their schools. Please?
Hm. I'm thinking these are families who might just be concerned about their children getting police records. Elf would run or hide when he was upset. When he ran, he would run as fast as he could away from the school, and at unpredictable times. (Well, unpredictable to them. I have a feeling *I* would be able to tell, but that wouldn't be fair for me to expect the staff to know until he'd been there a good while.)
And when you have a kid who steps one tiny pinky toe off campus, did you know the principal is supposed to technically call the police? Do this enough, and your child is a truant or worse. He gets a record. Social services gets involved. Maybe better to put the kid in lockup for a minute than deal with that. (Well, either option is rather unpalatable to me, thanks. But let's pretend you're an overwhelmed parent of a special-needs kid, and this is what the school says this-or-that has to happen. What to do?)
These children are admittedly hard to teach. They take a lot more effort than you might imagine. The parents, contrary to popular misconception, CANNOT JUST get all righteously indignant when the school does this to their kid and leave in a huff. They feel stuck. Maybe you've never been in a hole that deep as a parent. But it can happen to good ones, bad ones, or just regular moms like me.
Meanwhile, voting parents of "standard issue" kids don't get it. Hey, act right and you don't have to go to the closet. "Back in the day, when you sassed the teacher you got a good wallop and I turned out all right," seems to be the argument. In fact, did you know that schools can paddle your child here and not inform you? Well, now maybe that will change with this new law. Maybe they just have to outline the sorts of infractions that result in a paddling, or a closet locking, or whatever.
That won't solve the problem of "abuse in schools." But will it help? Will outlining the rules of the game help more people play fairly? I'm not sure.
And the reason I say that is that extreme behaviour is not a constant with these children. Without consistent and helpful teaching that is mindful of their disabilities, these children will likely not do any better no matter which "system" is implemented. These children simply do not learn from "consequences on the back end" of their behaviour (no, I don't mean spanking). I mean consequences AFTER things have gone bad... the child doesn't recall the LAST "no computer for two days" consequence last time she had a meltdown when she's about to have one THIS time. Later, when she's calm, she can tell you all about what went wrong when. She can tell you when she lost it and why.
You have to think of the old saying "short fuse," in my opinion. In working with these children, the object is to very carefully, and over time, give these kids ways to make that fuse a little longer. To teach them coping mechanisms for when things aren't going well. NOT to coddle them, but also NOT to throw them into an environment that there is NO WAY the child will be successful.
From the article:
"There is no monitoring or accountability," (parent Ange) Hemmer said. "They are giving direction back to the school districts, and that has already failed. Forcing school districts to have a written policy is not going to stop the abuse."
The law requires district policies to define "restraint," "seclusion," "time-out" and other terminology. The policies must describe the circumstances under which a restrictive intervention is allowed and list specific implementation requirements such as time limits, supervision and staff training. They must specify documentation used, such as permission and notification forms.
Missouri school districts will be required to draft policies regarding the use of "safe"or "recovery" rooms. The legislators in Missouri were at first thinking about using their heads and eliminating this, ahem, "option" for districts altogether, but then many parents called up and just begged them, PLEASE not to take this ability away from their schools. Please?
Hm. I'm thinking these are families who might just be concerned about their children getting police records. Elf would run or hide when he was upset. When he ran, he would run as fast as he could away from the school, and at unpredictable times. (Well, unpredictable to them. I have a feeling *I* would be able to tell, but that wouldn't be fair for me to expect the staff to know until he'd been there a good while.)
And when you have a kid who steps one tiny pinky toe off campus, did you know the principal is supposed to technically call the police? Do this enough, and your child is a truant or worse. He gets a record. Social services gets involved. Maybe better to put the kid in lockup for a minute than deal with that. (Well, either option is rather unpalatable to me, thanks. But let's pretend you're an overwhelmed parent of a special-needs kid, and this is what the school says this-or-that has to happen. What to do?)
These children are admittedly hard to teach. They take a lot more effort than you might imagine. The parents, contrary to popular misconception, CANNOT JUST get all righteously indignant when the school does this to their kid and leave in a huff. They feel stuck. Maybe you've never been in a hole that deep as a parent. But it can happen to good ones, bad ones, or just regular moms like me.
Meanwhile, voting parents of "standard issue" kids don't get it. Hey, act right and you don't have to go to the closet. "Back in the day, when you sassed the teacher you got a good wallop and I turned out all right," seems to be the argument. In fact, did you know that schools can paddle your child here and not inform you? Well, now maybe that will change with this new law. Maybe they just have to outline the sorts of infractions that result in a paddling, or a closet locking, or whatever.
That won't solve the problem of "abuse in schools." But will it help? Will outlining the rules of the game help more people play fairly? I'm not sure.
And the reason I say that is that extreme behaviour is not a constant with these children. Without consistent and helpful teaching that is mindful of their disabilities, these children will likely not do any better no matter which "system" is implemented. These children simply do not learn from "consequences on the back end" of their behaviour (no, I don't mean spanking). I mean consequences AFTER things have gone bad... the child doesn't recall the LAST "no computer for two days" consequence last time she had a meltdown when she's about to have one THIS time. Later, when she's calm, she can tell you all about what went wrong when. She can tell you when she lost it and why.
You have to think of the old saying "short fuse," in my opinion. In working with these children, the object is to very carefully, and over time, give these kids ways to make that fuse a little longer. To teach them coping mechanisms for when things aren't going well. NOT to coddle them, but also NOT to throw them into an environment that there is NO WAY the child will be successful.
From the article:
"There is no monitoring or accountability," (parent Ange) Hemmer said. "They are giving direction back to the school districts, and that has already failed. Forcing school districts to have a written policy is not going to stop the abuse."
The law requires district policies to define "restraint," "seclusion," "time-out" and other terminology. The policies must describe the circumstances under which a restrictive intervention is allowed and list specific implementation requirements such as time limits, supervision and staff training. They must specify documentation used, such as permission and notification forms.
16 May 2009
It is Still Happening.
Soapbox time again.
I've noticed on my sitemeter that someone popped by from Tennessee under the search words "can being locked in a closet cause behavior problems." (My heart sank into my stomach when I read that. Did you know I show up number two on that Google search?) Later, I received a comment from a distraught mother relating that HER autistic son was being locked up in a closet at school in Tennessee.
May God bless her as she figures out what she needs to do long-term.
I've left Erica a comment indicating some websites she can visit. I was tempted to overload her with about 20, but I left two. Sometimes when you're going through things, it's hard to even think straight. I know when I was going through things with Elf, it was somewhere between difficult and impossible to even function.
Erica relates that she is now homeschooling, but doesn't seem to feel very happy about it. She feels it's unfair. I'm so hearing you on this, Erica. I know you are going to get *so* much out of spending that time learning with your child, but I'm hearing you. It ISN'T fair. It ISN'T what you signed up for. Hard enough that your child has all these problems, but others are abandoning you just when you feel you could use some help. These experts, who are supposed to have these proven methods to make things better, are abusive and make things even worse.
I hear you. I really do.
But I would submit to you and my readers out there that a mediocre-to-crummy education, given with love, is going to produce a far better citizen than a good-to-great education doled out with abuse. Children growing up without acceptance of their disability ARE going to have behaviour problems. It doesn't have to be. You love your son and are investing all this time and energy into his life right now. It isn't for nothing. I believe in healing. Oh, no, I'm not excusing what the school did. At all. But I believe in healing.
I also believe in God and prayer, and that He can work miracles. Though as a mom of three autistic kiddos, I can tell you straight-up that they aren't always the miracles you're praying for.
Would you like to pop over to Erica's, or do you have some advice you'd like to offer here? I have a feeling she will be back to look from time to time as I will go back shortly and leave a link to this post on her blog. Thanks!
I've noticed on my sitemeter that someone popped by from Tennessee under the search words "can being locked in a closet cause behavior problems." (My heart sank into my stomach when I read that. Did you know I show up number two on that Google search?) Later, I received a comment from a distraught mother relating that HER autistic son was being locked up in a closet at school in Tennessee.
May God bless her as she figures out what she needs to do long-term.
I've left Erica a comment indicating some websites she can visit. I was tempted to overload her with about 20, but I left two. Sometimes when you're going through things, it's hard to even think straight. I know when I was going through things with Elf, it was somewhere between difficult and impossible to even function.
Erica relates that she is now homeschooling, but doesn't seem to feel very happy about it. She feels it's unfair. I'm so hearing you on this, Erica. I know you are going to get *so* much out of spending that time learning with your child, but I'm hearing you. It ISN'T fair. It ISN'T what you signed up for. Hard enough that your child has all these problems, but others are abandoning you just when you feel you could use some help. These experts, who are supposed to have these proven methods to make things better, are abusive and make things even worse.
I hear you. I really do.
But I would submit to you and my readers out there that a mediocre-to-crummy education, given with love, is going to produce a far better citizen than a good-to-great education doled out with abuse. Children growing up without acceptance of their disability ARE going to have behaviour problems. It doesn't have to be. You love your son and are investing all this time and energy into his life right now. It isn't for nothing. I believe in healing. Oh, no, I'm not excusing what the school did. At all. But I believe in healing.
I also believe in God and prayer, and that He can work miracles. Though as a mom of three autistic kiddos, I can tell you straight-up that they aren't always the miracles you're praying for.
Would you like to pop over to Erica's, or do you have some advice you'd like to offer here? I have a feeling she will be back to look from time to time as I will go back shortly and leave a link to this post on her blog. Thanks!
13 May 2009
Crap!
... Is what I said when I took a good gander at THIS. As of August 2011 in this proposed legislation, they're going to "track" all the autistic/ suspected autistic kids through THIRD GRADE so that they can figure out what the educational "best practices" would be with these children.
You dorks. I can tell you that "best practices" stuff for absolutely free, and you wouldn't even have to violate anyone's privacy to do it.
How about for starters we quit locking kids in closets for acting all disabled? Then maybe doing that thing called "listening to the parents" when they have a concern or want to actually, you know, sorta help craft that IEP might be nice. Another thing y'all should do is called "listen to the experts." When the parents have gone to the time and trouble of seeking out a specialist that knows a lot more than your ditzy special ed coordinator who attended a workshop on all this once (and most of the workshop consisted of legal ways to get out of helping the kid? Betya.), please just take a minute to listen to the advice they give. In retrospect, these special ed people were not ditzy. They were dang malicious because they KNEW what Elf needed to succeed and couldn't give a rip because it would cost them money and get them some heat from the people above them. How many people risked their jobs to say that what happened to Elf was wrong? How many people made any sort of formal complaint, or informed me about useful things to do that might force the district's hand?
I'll give you a hint... It's a round number.
I realize it might cost you a few pennies to implement these things in school. Hey, it might cost a lot of pennies. Don't like it? I'll be happy to sign petitions to our government asking it to please NOT link services to the disabled through the public schools for people ages three through 21. I think family-centered therapy would be much more in keeping with serving the needs of the truly disabled.
Sorry, but Joey switching a couple letters around or Sammy getting hyper and needing an extra recess ain't a disability. You might get FUNDED by the state as though it were, but it just isn't a disability like "blindness" or "having no legs" and that sort of thing is. That's why I don't think you guys really know a disability when you see it. Disability isn't always obvious like "blindness" or "having no legs."
Welcome to the 21st century. There's this thing called autism? And a lot of people have it? And I don't care so much about the cause, but I DO care that there isn't much REAL HELP out there for these children. In my price range, anyway. Sometimes when I see stories about "recovery" like this one, I want to just
Oh, how did that get deleted?
Well, anyway.
Can I mention without getting too personal the toll this sort of thing takes on a marriage? Things were AWFUL here right before Elf got taken out of school. Just awful. I'd have to pick the crying kid up. Hold that little shaking child as he begs me PLEASE don't send me back to this horrible place. Come home and fight with D as he thinks we need to give the school a "chance" (those bastards!) and he's going back tomorrow.
Think of my options.
Divorce? Great. Then I could be a single working parent, and have to send my kids back to school AND have no time in my schedule to pick the poor child up. Then instead of being in the closet for 20 minutes, he'd be there all. day. long. That would work! He'd lose a parent and we'd all of us get even more stress than we're already going through.
Prayer? Yeah, I guess that finally "worked," but do you know how hard it is to send your child into an abusive environment? To KNOW that it's abusive and not be able to say anything? To KNOW that you'd just BETTTTTTER get along with these people and try to be on their good side, because your husband won't back you up if you withdraw the kid and stomp out the door? To tell them oh... it's ok... don't worry... we'll have a better day tomorrow... and lie because you have to, when really you wish that
...
So, in conclusion, my heart goes out to those families who, for whatever reason, we left in school. And knowing we may be one of "those families" soon.
Woodjie says a couple words, but D thinks Woodjie will go to school if things aren't better. You define better. Yeah.
What am I going to do if things aren't "better?" Look at my options above. They really... stink. And to think I might have to interact with the same people who did all this to Elf, daily... and have to hear about how Woodjie is making "poor choices" and live with the fact that D doesn't want to do the lawyer thing...
I hate the whole idea. Not to be too melodramatic, but I would hate my whole life if it came to that. I can't imagine. And Woodjie doesn't even have the words to tell these people off.
Anyway...
This is one bad law. I just have enough to fight without this.
You dorks. I can tell you that "best practices" stuff for absolutely free, and you wouldn't even have to violate anyone's privacy to do it.
How about for starters we quit locking kids in closets for acting all disabled? Then maybe doing that thing called "listening to the parents" when they have a concern or want to actually, you know, sorta help craft that IEP might be nice. Another thing y'all should do is called "listen to the experts." When the parents have gone to the time and trouble of seeking out a specialist that knows a lot more than your ditzy special ed coordinator who attended a workshop on all this once (and most of the workshop consisted of legal ways to get out of helping the kid? Betya.), please just take a minute to listen to the advice they give. In retrospect, these special ed people were not ditzy. They were dang malicious because they KNEW what Elf needed to succeed and couldn't give a rip because it would cost them money and get them some heat from the people above them. How many people risked their jobs to say that what happened to Elf was wrong? How many people made any sort of formal complaint, or informed me about useful things to do that might force the district's hand?
I'll give you a hint... It's a round number.
I realize it might cost you a few pennies to implement these things in school. Hey, it might cost a lot of pennies. Don't like it? I'll be happy to sign petitions to our government asking it to please NOT link services to the disabled through the public schools for people ages three through 21. I think family-centered therapy would be much more in keeping with serving the needs of the truly disabled.
Sorry, but Joey switching a couple letters around or Sammy getting hyper and needing an extra recess ain't a disability. You might get FUNDED by the state as though it were, but it just isn't a disability like "blindness" or "having no legs" and that sort of thing is. That's why I don't think you guys really know a disability when you see it. Disability isn't always obvious like "blindness" or "having no legs."
Welcome to the 21st century. There's this thing called autism? And a lot of people have it? And I don't care so much about the cause, but I DO care that there isn't much REAL HELP out there for these children. In my price range, anyway. Sometimes when I see stories about "recovery" like this one, I want to just
Oh, how did that get deleted?
Well, anyway.
Can I mention without getting too personal the toll this sort of thing takes on a marriage? Things were AWFUL here right before Elf got taken out of school. Just awful. I'd have to pick the crying kid up. Hold that little shaking child as he begs me PLEASE don't send me back to this horrible place. Come home and fight with D as he thinks we need to give the school a "chance" (those bastards!) and he's going back tomorrow.
Think of my options.
Divorce? Great. Then I could be a single working parent, and have to send my kids back to school AND have no time in my schedule to pick the poor child up. Then instead of being in the closet for 20 minutes, he'd be there all. day. long. That would work! He'd lose a parent and we'd all of us get even more stress than we're already going through.
Prayer? Yeah, I guess that finally "worked," but do you know how hard it is to send your child into an abusive environment? To KNOW that it's abusive and not be able to say anything? To KNOW that you'd just BETTTTTTER get along with these people and try to be on their good side, because your husband won't back you up if you withdraw the kid and stomp out the door? To tell them oh... it's ok... don't worry... we'll have a better day tomorrow... and lie because you have to, when really you wish that
...
So, in conclusion, my heart goes out to those families who, for whatever reason, we left in school. And knowing we may be one of "those families" soon.
Woodjie says a couple words, but D thinks Woodjie will go to school if things aren't better. You define better. Yeah.
What am I going to do if things aren't "better?" Look at my options above. They really... stink. And to think I might have to interact with the same people who did all this to Elf, daily... and have to hear about how Woodjie is making "poor choices" and live with the fact that D doesn't want to do the lawyer thing...
I hate the whole idea. Not to be too melodramatic, but I would hate my whole life if it came to that. I can't imagine. And Woodjie doesn't even have the words to tell these people off.
Anyway...
This is one bad law. I just have enough to fight without this.
06 May 2009
Change in the Classroom!
I wish I could just shout about how NO Child should be Left Behind in an abusive situation. I understand, of course, that when we pulled Elf from the public school, that we were leaving other children behind. There are other children going through what Elf went though and much, much worse. I know I can't save them all, but it makes me want to cry.
It makes me want to DO something about it. So I write. I hope you're reading.
Contrary to celebrity yapping on tv today, abuse is not inadequate teaching of Darwinism in private homes. Abuse, REAL and SERIOUS abuse, can happen at home or, as this blog post will discuss, at school. Abuse happens when children are locked in closets, slapped, strapped to chairs, belittled before peers and not having their educational needs met by the people who are paid by the taxpayers to do so.
"The Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, Inc. (COPAA) today released a report asking Congress to stop the use of restraints, seclusion, and aversives upon children with disabilities in school. The report entitled, Unsafe In The Schoolhouse: Abuse Of Children With Disabilities, details 143 incidents of the use of abusive interventions against children with disabilities in school. The report also includes suggested legislative remedies." (Excerpt of a press release, found on Missouri: Families Against Seclusion and Restraint blog, though I added the link in the middle of the quote.)
Of particular concern is the fact that many of these documented incidents occurred in young children:
"The relative ages of the children can also underscore the imbalance that occurs
in schools between larger, older adults and young children. Approximately
86% of the children were under age 14. Of course, mistreating older teenagers
is as wrong as mistreating preschoolers. Abusive techniques should never be
used with any child or person with a disability--no matter how old they may be.
People with disabilities are often at special risk of abuse. This is particularly
true of children and teens with cognitive, developmental, emotional, and
communications impairments."
If I may...
It's much easier to bully a tiny kid than it is a huge hulking teen. I'll bet you most of these teachers didn't start out their day with, "I think today I'll pick on a little kid and strap her to a chair. That would be fun!" But I will say that during the course of "difficult interactions," the staff is going to think twice before sending my 6 ft. 1 inch kid to a closet. First off, they're going to have quite the physical fight on their hands if they try to make him do something against his will. Second, my son can not only speak, but he can remember faces and names. I'm not going to say he's completely safe. I'm just going to say that it's a lot less likely for G to be placed in a potentially abusive situation than a small six-year-old.
Wouldn't YOU be more likely to "talk out" problems with this great big kid than try to physically force him into a chair or closet? Right now, the staff is working well with G, and most of my concern is for the other families out there. What would happen to families like ours if things fell apart at school?
I hope that Congress listens to what the report says. As much as I believe in local control of schools, I also believe that a child's civil rights are violated every time something like this is practiced. It's time that we protected all of our citizens. These children cannot advocate for themselves.
It makes me want to DO something about it. So I write. I hope you're reading.
Contrary to celebrity yapping on tv today, abuse is not inadequate teaching of Darwinism in private homes. Abuse, REAL and SERIOUS abuse, can happen at home or, as this blog post will discuss, at school. Abuse happens when children are locked in closets, slapped, strapped to chairs, belittled before peers and not having their educational needs met by the people who are paid by the taxpayers to do so.
"The Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, Inc. (COPAA) today released a report asking Congress to stop the use of restraints, seclusion, and aversives upon children with disabilities in school. The report entitled, Unsafe In The Schoolhouse: Abuse Of Children With Disabilities, details 143 incidents of the use of abusive interventions against children with disabilities in school. The report also includes suggested legislative remedies." (Excerpt of a press release, found on Missouri: Families Against Seclusion and Restraint blog, though I added the link in the middle of the quote.)
Of particular concern is the fact that many of these documented incidents occurred in young children:
"The relative ages of the children can also underscore the imbalance that occurs
in schools between larger, older adults and young children. Approximately
86% of the children were under age 14. Of course, mistreating older teenagers
is as wrong as mistreating preschoolers. Abusive techniques should never be
used with any child or person with a disability--no matter how old they may be.
People with disabilities are often at special risk of abuse. This is particularly
true of children and teens with cognitive, developmental, emotional, and
communications impairments."
If I may...
It's much easier to bully a tiny kid than it is a huge hulking teen. I'll bet you most of these teachers didn't start out their day with, "I think today I'll pick on a little kid and strap her to a chair. That would be fun!" But I will say that during the course of "difficult interactions," the staff is going to think twice before sending my 6 ft. 1 inch kid to a closet. First off, they're going to have quite the physical fight on their hands if they try to make him do something against his will. Second, my son can not only speak, but he can remember faces and names. I'm not going to say he's completely safe. I'm just going to say that it's a lot less likely for G to be placed in a potentially abusive situation than a small six-year-old.
Wouldn't YOU be more likely to "talk out" problems with this great big kid than try to physically force him into a chair or closet? Right now, the staff is working well with G, and most of my concern is for the other families out there. What would happen to families like ours if things fell apart at school?
I hope that Congress listens to what the report says. As much as I believe in local control of schools, I also believe that a child's civil rights are violated every time something like this is practiced. It's time that we protected all of our citizens. These children cannot advocate for themselves.
22 April 2009
The Locked Closet.
“The biggest loophole is the outright lie that these rooms are only being used to help the children,” Ms. Vance said.
This article deals with the idea that schools deserve more money so that they can handle potentially difficult situations. I mean, their employees are the ones who designed and bought the locked closets with public money. And they've been using public money to lock the kids in there for years. So let's give them more money! They've been handling what they have already so well...
Of course, there are no calls to fire all staff who have used these "timeout" rooms when they're not completely, absolutely and irrefutably necessary.
Of course, people understand where a child who has been bullied by other kids and called names eventually calls one back. Or where a child whose peers are taunting him might eventually smack another kid upside the head. There are *consequences* for these behaviours, especially under these "zero tolerance" insanities, but everyone understands that when a kid acts out that there's a reason behind it. Usually staff will at least ask the child what happened that he felt he had to say, "I hate you" to the other kid on the playground or whatever.
Um, unless you're dealing with a handicapped child. See, with a handicapped child, all the rules are different because unless the child has a PHYSICAL disability, teachers expect the kid to act like everyone else. We make allowances for PHYSICAL disabilities. When we see Stevie Wonder rock on stage, we know that his rocking helps him get a feel for his surroundings due to his blindness. The autistic kid hiding under the desk, though, well, that's just disobedience. Sit up in your chair or I'll call the principal.
That's what happened to Elf. The kid is autistic. He was barely six, *barely*. He was overwhelmed in a class of **27** kids and one very old teacher who should have retired long ago. Elf would be upset and overwhelmed and trying to recoup the only way he knows how. But, no. Here comes the principal because Elf disobeyed by not snapping out of his autism, sitting at the desk right next to the other children who are touching him in this room full of distractions... wow. Principal tells him to come out NOW or else.
Or else happens.
Principal drags the kid out and Elf runs away. He runs away! Closet time. We don't run away at school. Then we're surprised when Elf panics and the behaviour escalates. We're surprised that Elf hates school and starts to act up more. We're surprised when Elf doesn't bother hiding under the desk anymore but plans ahead for crowded hallway times or places where the teacher is otherwise occupied and bolts for the school exit.
Sure, it would have been a little distracting to let the Elf sit under the desk, but most other kids aren't really going to follow suit because it's cool. I've heard the argument that if you let ONE kid "get away" with using his favourite marker on a test or sit in a beanbag chair, that EVERYONE will want to. Well, they might want to, but if you tell them that the kid has a disability and explain his need for personal space to calm down, most kids will get it. After all, they've seen the freakout sessions before. Children can learn to get along with differently-abled peers, but I'm not so sure about the adults.
G, for example, needs to walk about in the hallway every now and then so he can refocus. I don't see the other children in the class clamouring for their own "G is pacing" special pass to display so they can walk back and forth in the hallway for three minutes. The only people not getting that are the teachers.
G's social studies teacher is, well, I dislike him. Social studies used to be G's fave subject. Now he hates it. The teacher has written things like "rebellious and defiant" on his report card. He makes snide comments about how HE wishes he could take a break any time he stinkin' feels like it in the hall and HE wishes he could have accomodations like G.
I understand the man is old and has been teaching since America was a colony. I get that he probably didn't sign on to handle autistic children and kids with mental and emotional handicaps way back in 1737. I get that. But tough crap. Retire if you don't like it. It's your job now.
Though I would right along with him that it shouldn't be. I would argue that, for the sake of the educational establishment AND the children with handicaps, that the federal funding for helping handicapped children with services NOT go to the public schools. As Ange would say while showing you a picture of a locked closet, "Does this look like the 'least restrictive' educational environment to you?" Me neither.
Somehow, though, the NEA wants us to all believe that if we throw a big bunch-o billions o' bucks at the problem, we can TRAIN teachers to become wonderfully sensitive to the needs of handicapped students. They'll learn about how to use the "time-out" rooms so that they are not used as punishment anymore. Because "time-out" shouldn't signify punishment to your mind. It's helping the child just as a really hard swat on the head would knock some sense into him.
(Oooh, wouldn't THAT be a cheap solution!?? I shudder to think.)
Staff that were once irresponsive to the needs of disabled children will suddenly, through this magical training provided at big-time taxpayer expense, see the error of their ways, repent, and defuse tense situations with the secret "open sesame" words they learned in these workshops:
"Advocates, as well as educational organizations, agree that more training is necessary to cut down on the use of restraints and seclusion in school.
“Probably the most frustrating thing we hear is that people at the local level don’t feel like they have an alternative,” said Ms. Trader of TASH. “We would like to get to a place where there’s not one teacher who says that, and where the standard is that people know what to do to support kids who have behavior issues. It would be inexcusable if an elementary school teacher didn’t know how to teach literacy, but it is excusable that they don’t know how to deal with behavior.”
"Patricia K. Ralabate, a senior policy analyst for the National Education Association, said the union is working on a document that will walk teachers through techniques to defuse difficult situations."
YES! The NEA is totally, absolutely on the side of the children and wouldn't be... oh, I don't know... representing their members and looking for more money for public education?
More and more, I'm starting to think that public ed. is a nice theory, but it does NOT serve the needs of handicapped children. Go read some of the teacher blogs and see how they write about these kids. I dare you to spend a day reading posts about how deeply these folks care about the students. So much so that they value their privacy enough to retell behaviour horror stories in detail. So much so that they wish these kids would go away. So much so that they are critical of the parents and/or administration in their posts.
Just go look sometime. I'd provide a few links, but a lot of these people have friends and one of them might just figure out who I am and where I live. I still have two older children in public school (various reasons, another post) and these people and their lawyer$ scare me. They really, truly scare me.
This article deals with the idea that schools deserve more money so that they can handle potentially difficult situations. I mean, their employees are the ones who designed and bought the locked closets with public money. And they've been using public money to lock the kids in there for years. So let's give them more money! They've been handling what they have already so well...
Of course, there are no calls to fire all staff who have used these "timeout" rooms when they're not completely, absolutely and irrefutably necessary.
Of course, people understand where a child who has been bullied by other kids and called names eventually calls one back. Or where a child whose peers are taunting him might eventually smack another kid upside the head. There are *consequences* for these behaviours, especially under these "zero tolerance" insanities, but everyone understands that when a kid acts out that there's a reason behind it. Usually staff will at least ask the child what happened that he felt he had to say, "I hate you" to the other kid on the playground or whatever.
Um, unless you're dealing with a handicapped child. See, with a handicapped child, all the rules are different because unless the child has a PHYSICAL disability, teachers expect the kid to act like everyone else. We make allowances for PHYSICAL disabilities. When we see Stevie Wonder rock on stage, we know that his rocking helps him get a feel for his surroundings due to his blindness. The autistic kid hiding under the desk, though, well, that's just disobedience. Sit up in your chair or I'll call the principal.
That's what happened to Elf. The kid is autistic. He was barely six, *barely*. He was overwhelmed in a class of **27** kids and one very old teacher who should have retired long ago. Elf would be upset and overwhelmed and trying to recoup the only way he knows how. But, no. Here comes the principal because Elf disobeyed by not snapping out of his autism, sitting at the desk right next to the other children who are touching him in this room full of distractions... wow. Principal tells him to come out NOW or else.
Or else happens.
Principal drags the kid out and Elf runs away. He runs away! Closet time. We don't run away at school. Then we're surprised when Elf panics and the behaviour escalates. We're surprised that Elf hates school and starts to act up more. We're surprised when Elf doesn't bother hiding under the desk anymore but plans ahead for crowded hallway times or places where the teacher is otherwise occupied and bolts for the school exit.
Sure, it would have been a little distracting to let the Elf sit under the desk, but most other kids aren't really going to follow suit because it's cool. I've heard the argument that if you let ONE kid "get away" with using his favourite marker on a test or sit in a beanbag chair, that EVERYONE will want to. Well, they might want to, but if you tell them that the kid has a disability and explain his need for personal space to calm down, most kids will get it. After all, they've seen the freakout sessions before. Children can learn to get along with differently-abled peers, but I'm not so sure about the adults.
G, for example, needs to walk about in the hallway every now and then so he can refocus. I don't see the other children in the class clamouring for their own "G is pacing" special pass to display so they can walk back and forth in the hallway for three minutes. The only people not getting that are the teachers.
G's social studies teacher is, well, I dislike him. Social studies used to be G's fave subject. Now he hates it. The teacher has written things like "rebellious and defiant" on his report card. He makes snide comments about how HE wishes he could take a break any time he stinkin' feels like it in the hall and HE wishes he could have accomodations like G.
I understand the man is old and has been teaching since America was a colony. I get that he probably didn't sign on to handle autistic children and kids with mental and emotional handicaps way back in 1737. I get that. But tough crap. Retire if you don't like it. It's your job now.
Though I would right along with him that it shouldn't be. I would argue that, for the sake of the educational establishment AND the children with handicaps, that the federal funding for helping handicapped children with services NOT go to the public schools. As Ange would say while showing you a picture of a locked closet, "Does this look like the 'least restrictive' educational environment to you?" Me neither.
Somehow, though, the NEA wants us to all believe that if we throw a big bunch-o billions o' bucks at the problem, we can TRAIN teachers to become wonderfully sensitive to the needs of handicapped students. They'll learn about how to use the "time-out" rooms so that they are not used as punishment anymore. Because "time-out" shouldn't signify punishment to your mind. It's helping the child just as a really hard swat on the head would knock some sense into him.
(Oooh, wouldn't THAT be a cheap solution!?? I shudder to think.)
Staff that were once irresponsive to the needs of disabled children will suddenly, through this magical training provided at big-time taxpayer expense, see the error of their ways, repent, and defuse tense situations with the secret "open sesame" words they learned in these workshops:
"Advocates, as well as educational organizations, agree that more training is necessary to cut down on the use of restraints and seclusion in school.
“Probably the most frustrating thing we hear is that people at the local level don’t feel like they have an alternative,” said Ms. Trader of TASH. “We would like to get to a place where there’s not one teacher who says that, and where the standard is that people know what to do to support kids who have behavior issues. It would be inexcusable if an elementary school teacher didn’t know how to teach literacy, but it is excusable that they don’t know how to deal with behavior.”
"Patricia K. Ralabate, a senior policy analyst for the National Education Association, said the union is working on a document that will walk teachers through techniques to defuse difficult situations."
YES! The NEA is totally, absolutely on the side of the children and wouldn't be... oh, I don't know... representing their members and looking for more money for public education?
More and more, I'm starting to think that public ed. is a nice theory, but it does NOT serve the needs of handicapped children. Go read some of the teacher blogs and see how they write about these kids. I dare you to spend a day reading posts about how deeply these folks care about the students. So much so that they value their privacy enough to retell behaviour horror stories in detail. So much so that they wish these kids would go away. So much so that they are critical of the parents and/or administration in their posts.
Just go look sometime. I'd provide a few links, but a lot of these people have friends and one of them might just figure out who I am and where I live. I still have two older children in public school (various reasons, another post) and these people and their lawyer$ scare me. They really, truly scare me.
11 April 2009
Homeschooling Special-Needs Children
Recently, LAA and Family left a comment on my blog about special needs homeschooling, and some of my comments are in black:
I hope you and Emperor will be happier with him being home. I'm really surprised that a school would "suspend" a kindergartner! Yep, you'd think... But Emperor managed to get himself suspended a couple of times in those first couple of weeks. I won't deny that the kid could be "naughty," and I'm not just making the excuse that my kid can do whatever he wants because he has sensory issues... but yeah. You would think that his coming from a "special needs" preschool would clue the staff to the fact that Emperor might have... oh, I don't know... "special needs," maybe? JUST because he didn't have a special educational label, DOESN'T mean the kid didn't get special help at the preschool for a reason. The morons.
While I think I may have hurt my son's special education teacher's feelings when I withdrew him from school, I don't think anybody was unhappy to see him go. Isn't that sad? I can feel for you. Sometimes I wonder in retrospect if my younger children and I weren't sort of "pushed" out of the system. Sure does make things cheaper for them...
He was never all that much of a behavior problem but the likelihood was becoming much greater the older he got. With you there. The cute five-year-old who likes to pretend he his a pinball and spin everywhere is almost sort of cute, but the 16-year-old who does it is seen as rather belligerent. And my son would NO WAY sit still, which is seen as disobedient. Yet he's really very smart. This kid could add columns of multidigit numbers upon ENTRANCE into kindergarten, but goody for them if they weren't trying to teach him what a "square" was anyway as part of the math curriculum. His messy handwriting could really fool you into thinking he is less intelligent or mature than he really is.
I really like HSLDA.. but for all they recommend you do for homeschooling a special needs child or "struggling learner" as they call them, (documentation, using a consultant, etc..) it almost seems easier to keep your child in school. WOW, we're like twins or something here. Thankfully, for Emperor at least, all the problems he had in school seemed to manifest as behaviour concerns. His academics are pretty stellar, so I find no need to hire the consultant and all that for him. Same idea for Elf, although Elf is a bit older and doing the same academics as other children of the same age. Not too far ahead in math, but not too far behind in English that I feel I need to "cover" myself there.
I have mixed feelings about HSLDA's recommendations. I think they want to be able to defend the cases and WIN the ones they take on, so I can hardly blame them for their suggestions in that respect. However, it does make homeschooling a special needs child who is mentally challenged or severely disabled less practical in application. It's almost as if HSLDA is asking you to document with credentialled specialists and side therapies the things that the school should (by law) be giving you for free anyway. And no, the "least restrictive environment" is not getting a couple speech worksheets with six other kids during your therapy time. I don't care if the therapist is licensed or not. Having a time period for licensed speech therapy in an IEP doesn't mean jack poo if they're doing the stuff six IEP kids in a room and give them worksheets for their therapy thing.
It bothers me that the schools are not really fully accountable to the courts for educational neglect in the same way that a parent would be. YES, parents are ultimately responsible for the education of their children. It seems that special-needs kids get left in the ditch, though. The parents are not always good advocates. They don't always know what is available, and the schools are not always forthright. The laws are written in such a way that it seems parents must say the "magic code words" to unlock the ability for certain therapies to be given to a child. And hey, when Mom and Dad don't know how to ask, and the school doesn't give, the kid just goes through his education as best he can and the schools are never called to account.
Let Mom and Dad do the best job they can home-educating, though...
It is a little disconcerting. Especially when I read about special-ed law in places like Vermont. Talk about scary. They pretty much OWN your kid in the schools if he has a special need of any kind. No, you cannot completely leave the system with your child to home educate unless you leave the state. Good luck to ya. HSLDA has been losing battles in that state.
I am concerned about a national law regulating homeschooling because I'm sure states like Vermont would like to have a say-so about it. It seems to me that special-needs kids are easy to target because, "LOOOOK! The kid can't even read and he's nine!" or, "This homeschooler is SEVEN YEARS behind our state Show Me Standards!!" does draw outrage from the average citizen. Sigh.
I hope you and Emperor will be happier with him being home. I'm really surprised that a school would "suspend" a kindergartner! Yep, you'd think... But Emperor managed to get himself suspended a couple of times in those first couple of weeks. I won't deny that the kid could be "naughty," and I'm not just making the excuse that my kid can do whatever he wants because he has sensory issues... but yeah. You would think that his coming from a "special needs" preschool would clue the staff to the fact that Emperor might have... oh, I don't know... "special needs," maybe? JUST because he didn't have a special educational label, DOESN'T mean the kid didn't get special help at the preschool for a reason. The morons.
While I think I may have hurt my son's special education teacher's feelings when I withdrew him from school, I don't think anybody was unhappy to see him go. Isn't that sad? I can feel for you. Sometimes I wonder in retrospect if my younger children and I weren't sort of "pushed" out of the system. Sure does make things cheaper for them...
He was never all that much of a behavior problem but the likelihood was becoming much greater the older he got. With you there. The cute five-year-old who likes to pretend he his a pinball and spin everywhere is almost sort of cute, but the 16-year-old who does it is seen as rather belligerent. And my son would NO WAY sit still, which is seen as disobedient. Yet he's really very smart. This kid could add columns of multidigit numbers upon ENTRANCE into kindergarten, but goody for them if they weren't trying to teach him what a "square" was anyway as part of the math curriculum. His messy handwriting could really fool you into thinking he is less intelligent or mature than he really is.
I really like HSLDA.. but for all they recommend you do for homeschooling a special needs child or "struggling learner" as they call them, (documentation, using a consultant, etc..) it almost seems easier to keep your child in school. WOW, we're like twins or something here. Thankfully, for Emperor at least, all the problems he had in school seemed to manifest as behaviour concerns. His academics are pretty stellar, so I find no need to hire the consultant and all that for him. Same idea for Elf, although Elf is a bit older and doing the same academics as other children of the same age. Not too far ahead in math, but not too far behind in English that I feel I need to "cover" myself there.
I have mixed feelings about HSLDA's recommendations. I think they want to be able to defend the cases and WIN the ones they take on, so I can hardly blame them for their suggestions in that respect. However, it does make homeschooling a special needs child who is mentally challenged or severely disabled less practical in application. It's almost as if HSLDA is asking you to document with credentialled specialists and side therapies the things that the school should (by law) be giving you for free anyway. And no, the "least restrictive environment" is not getting a couple speech worksheets with six other kids during your therapy time. I don't care if the therapist is licensed or not. Having a time period for licensed speech therapy in an IEP doesn't mean jack poo if they're doing the stuff six IEP kids in a room and give them worksheets for their therapy thing.
It bothers me that the schools are not really fully accountable to the courts for educational neglect in the same way that a parent would be. YES, parents are ultimately responsible for the education of their children. It seems that special-needs kids get left in the ditch, though. The parents are not always good advocates. They don't always know what is available, and the schools are not always forthright. The laws are written in such a way that it seems parents must say the "magic code words" to unlock the ability for certain therapies to be given to a child. And hey, when Mom and Dad don't know how to ask, and the school doesn't give, the kid just goes through his education as best he can and the schools are never called to account.
Let Mom and Dad do the best job they can home-educating, though...
It is a little disconcerting. Especially when I read about special-ed law in places like Vermont. Talk about scary. They pretty much OWN your kid in the schools if he has a special need of any kind. No, you cannot completely leave the system with your child to home educate unless you leave the state. Good luck to ya. HSLDA has been losing battles in that state.
I am concerned about a national law regulating homeschooling because I'm sure states like Vermont would like to have a say-so about it. It seems to me that special-needs kids are easy to target because, "LOOOOK! The kid can't even read and he's nine!" or, "This homeschooler is SEVEN YEARS behind our state Show Me Standards!!" does draw outrage from the average citizen. Sigh.
16 January 2009
Restraint and Seclusion Should Be Banned in Public Schools.
Except in very rare, isolated and EXTREME instances, this practice needs to end in all public schools. There needs to be accountability and parents should always be informed. Thank you, Senator Dodd, for your speech on this issue. Hat tip: Missouri Families Against Seclusion and Restraint blog. Ordinarily, I'd say the federal government needs to stay OUT of public education, but this is a civil rights issue. How many people are griping today that the government got involved to break up state-run segregation in public schools 50 years ago? Someday, I think we will look back on these times as the "bad old days" when so little was known or understood about how to truly help those with developmental disorders and/or autism. Hey, if you want to run your own school with your own money, go ahead and keep black people, Christians, autistic people or whoever you want out. (Not that I'd want to go to your stinky school anyway...) But my tax money shouldn't be used to lock my children up AND defend the abusers who practice this in court. I'm going to voice a disagreement with one idea in this speech: most people who pull this crap are NOT GOOD PEOPLE who just don't know what to do. They are abusers. They should not keep their jobs, let alone receive "training" on the public's dime.
18 December 2008
Rethink Our Schools
...a website I've discovered lately that criticises the now-widespread use of BIST and "zero-tolerance" in public schools. A sample story snippet concerning a recent transfer student asking a math question:
"... but the teacher had said 'no questions now.' The child raised his hand again and the teacher then sent him to the safe seat for 'being disruptive.' When he got sat down in the safe seat he asked if she would answer his question now. This got him sent straight to the “Buddy Room” where he was told to sit down and do his work, but he said he couldn’t do the work because he still had that question about it, whereupon he was sent to the “Recovery Room” (my note: read this as "closet") where he said he didn’t even know why he was there since he didn’t do anything (of course by this time he is indignant since all he had done was try to ask a legitimate question about his math lesson)."
(OK, this kid was transferred from another school and didn't realize that he needed to just shut up and show "respect" to get by. He had no clue and the escalation by this point probably has him more than a *little* angry, scared and traumatized!)
"So he got sent to the vice principal for being a wise guy. The principal ended up calling in the parents and sending the kid home. So in this case the poor kid gets put through the entire discipline system and the parents get called in just because the teacher wouldn’t answer his question and refused to simply ignore his raised hand until the appropriate time for questions."
Yeah, well, as long as the kid learned to show respect for the teacher, eh? At least that day, I suppose she reigned supreme. It's entirely possible the kid was sassy during math class, but does he need to get locked into a closet as a result?? One aspect of the BIST program that really bothers me is that they literally go through all the steps in reverse until your child can go back to class. So from the "recovery room" (closet), he'd go to the "Buddy room," which is another class, where your child would work on a "Think sheet" (coerced confession... sometimes your kid is guilty and sometimes he's not, but he WILL confess!). Then he will speak with and apologize to the teacher and talk about how things will "look next time." That is, how HE is responsible for the problem, takes ownership and responsibility, and makes positive changes the next time the problem comes up before it escalates.
Yeah. Sounds like a program you want for YOUR local public school, eh?
"... but the teacher had said 'no questions now.' The child raised his hand again and the teacher then sent him to the safe seat for 'being disruptive.' When he got sat down in the safe seat he asked if she would answer his question now. This got him sent straight to the “Buddy Room” where he was told to sit down and do his work, but he said he couldn’t do the work because he still had that question about it, whereupon he was sent to the “Recovery Room” (my note: read this as "closet") where he said he didn’t even know why he was there since he didn’t do anything (of course by this time he is indignant since all he had done was try to ask a legitimate question about his math lesson)."
(OK, this kid was transferred from another school and didn't realize that he needed to just shut up and show "respect" to get by. He had no clue and the escalation by this point probably has him more than a *little* angry, scared and traumatized!)
"So he got sent to the vice principal for being a wise guy. The principal ended up calling in the parents and sending the kid home. So in this case the poor kid gets put through the entire discipline system and the parents get called in just because the teacher wouldn’t answer his question and refused to simply ignore his raised hand until the appropriate time for questions."
Yeah, well, as long as the kid learned to show respect for the teacher, eh? At least that day, I suppose she reigned supreme. It's entirely possible the kid was sassy during math class, but does he need to get locked into a closet as a result?? One aspect of the BIST program that really bothers me is that they literally go through all the steps in reverse until your child can go back to class. So from the "recovery room" (closet), he'd go to the "Buddy room," which is another class, where your child would work on a "Think sheet" (coerced confession... sometimes your kid is guilty and sometimes he's not, but he WILL confess!). Then he will speak with and apologize to the teacher and talk about how things will "look next time." That is, how HE is responsible for the problem, takes ownership and responsibility, and makes positive changes the next time the problem comes up before it escalates.
Yeah. Sounds like a program you want for YOUR local public school, eh?
20 May 2007
On Sexism and Autism
Two of our five boys are autistic. They have been diagnosed at a Childrens' Hospital and not a psychologist using a checklist... and I think the diagnosis is (unfortunately!) probably accurate. The other three either have not been tested, or are given some catchall label in the (VAIN!) hopes of getting help from the school district.
Don't get me started on the school district...
We've had some great teachers over the years. We really have. One in particular, the Emperor's preschool teacher, is going to be VERY sorely missed when the Emperor graduates in a few days from the program. She teaches a mostly special-needs preschool and is really gentle and energetic. She knows how to integrate the therapies the kids need into the school day so they think they're playing! In short, she's awesome.
G also has a *wonderful* case manager in the middle school. I can't say enough good things about her. G has a lot of difficulty sometimes in school and really needs help with social situations (what does that look or that expression MEAN?) or in reasoning out that just because he is angry right now does not mean everyone is against him. His case manager is able to make allowances for him. She's able to manipulate that environment a bit so it's more G-friendly. She sends home daily checklists so I get a good feel for how his day was without a big preachy sermon or judgmental comments. I really like her.
But we've found that the school district as a whole does NOT really understand the needs of Christian or special needs families. Oh, my goodness. The Elf is autistic and runs away when he is in a large group. He gets overwhelmed! What's the solution to that? Oh, let's suspend him for his behaviour. Oh, let's lock the kid in a closet and call it a "safe room." Oh, that doesn't work? We're here to help! We'll assign someone to be with the Elf all the time. He's autistic and can't deal with change well? Well, that's not in the budget. The staff member with him will change literally every 15 minutes. We're here to help!
Worse, they'd assign someone about 65 years old to watch the Elf. Do you think she can catch him when he runs away? Or the situation we encountered at a private preschool: We'll assign someone 98 months pregnant to watch nine kids and then act surprised when the Elf almost makes it to the highway. He made bad choices, lady, and you'd better teach your kid better at home and put some consequences in there! What's wrong with you as a parent??
SO, I'm a sexist pig. I prefer young male teachers for Elf when he is at church or anywhere else because they can run and the cannot get pregnant. They also tend not to want to tell you long stories about how the Elf made "bad choices" and blah blah blah. It's probably a bad attitude for me to have. On the one hand, I *do* want to know what is going on, but I don't want inordinate amounts of detail ALL the time EVERY time he is out of my sight. He's not out of my sight that often. He's homeschooled now. I take him to the library and might leave him for about 2 minutes (literally!) to go to the bathroom or check out a book. Even then his feet or his head is in my line of vision. I leave him for about an hour at church. And that's it.
Thankfully, the church we attend is wonderful. They actually LISTEN to me when I tell them I would prefer to have a male teacher at least in the general vicinity. Several times Mr. B has run through the building to catch a running Elf. Mr. B, God bless him, is big enough to just hold the Elf in one arm and carry the child back to class.
Don't get me started on the school district...
We've had some great teachers over the years. We really have. One in particular, the Emperor's preschool teacher, is going to be VERY sorely missed when the Emperor graduates in a few days from the program. She teaches a mostly special-needs preschool and is really gentle and energetic. She knows how to integrate the therapies the kids need into the school day so they think they're playing! In short, she's awesome.
G also has a *wonderful* case manager in the middle school. I can't say enough good things about her. G has a lot of difficulty sometimes in school and really needs help with social situations (what does that look or that expression MEAN?) or in reasoning out that just because he is angry right now does not mean everyone is against him. His case manager is able to make allowances for him. She's able to manipulate that environment a bit so it's more G-friendly. She sends home daily checklists so I get a good feel for how his day was without a big preachy sermon or judgmental comments. I really like her.
But we've found that the school district as a whole does NOT really understand the needs of Christian or special needs families. Oh, my goodness. The Elf is autistic and runs away when he is in a large group. He gets overwhelmed! What's the solution to that? Oh, let's suspend him for his behaviour. Oh, let's lock the kid in a closet and call it a "safe room." Oh, that doesn't work? We're here to help! We'll assign someone to be with the Elf all the time. He's autistic and can't deal with change well? Well, that's not in the budget. The staff member with him will change literally every 15 minutes. We're here to help!
Worse, they'd assign someone about 65 years old to watch the Elf. Do you think she can catch him when he runs away? Or the situation we encountered at a private preschool: We'll assign someone 98 months pregnant to watch nine kids and then act surprised when the Elf almost makes it to the highway. He made bad choices, lady, and you'd better teach your kid better at home and put some consequences in there! What's wrong with you as a parent??
SO, I'm a sexist pig. I prefer young male teachers for Elf when he is at church or anywhere else because they can run and the cannot get pregnant. They also tend not to want to tell you long stories about how the Elf made "bad choices" and blah blah blah. It's probably a bad attitude for me to have. On the one hand, I *do* want to know what is going on, but I don't want inordinate amounts of detail ALL the time EVERY time he is out of my sight. He's not out of my sight that often. He's homeschooled now. I take him to the library and might leave him for about 2 minutes (literally!) to go to the bathroom or check out a book. Even then his feet or his head is in my line of vision. I leave him for about an hour at church. And that's it.
Thankfully, the church we attend is wonderful. They actually LISTEN to me when I tell them I would prefer to have a male teacher at least in the general vicinity. Several times Mr. B has run through the building to catch a running Elf. Mr. B, God bless him, is big enough to just hold the Elf in one arm and carry the child back to class.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Happenings at the House
Well... I've absolutely neglected this blog. I kept meaning to get back to it but then what do you say. Sometimes I just peek at other...
-
Do you train your children to be good church attenders and/or follow YOUR chosen faith? Lately, various blogs have been exploring the issue ...
-
I wish I'd have known this starting out. I wish I'd have known that it's actually LESS work to just homeschool your child, than...
