9486 in the collection
Tax commission's report targets special ed services
Joseph Mugivan
Comment:
This article by the state teacher's union fails
to make any concessions for the neediest
students. One Special Ed advocate believes that
billions of dollars have been diverted.
The union says that: "They only listened
to people who wanted to cut costs, not those
speaking on behalf of the students."
That's not true.
I am a teacher before I am a union member. I
testified on behalf of students indicating that
kids are being labelled, and possibly ruined,
at an early age in order for districts to
obtain these funds. Too many children are
segregated from the main stream at an early
age.
The union article states:
"The commission recommends a number of steps
aimed at decreasing the special education
classification rates and accelerating the
mainstreaming of students by providing students
with extra help within the general education
setting."
This statement of the commission is absolutely
supporting kids and I testified as such. We are
not speaking of the seriously handicapped, but
those children who may just not be prepared in
early childhood and are labeled and isolated
with "disabilities" to fund the special
interests.
See Joseph Mugivan's
testimony below the NYSUT article. He presents
an outrage--and offers a constructive
alternative.
by Sylvia Saunders, New York
Teacher
Abolishing state mandates that go beyond
federal requirements would gut essential
special education services for students with
disabilities, under a plan unveiled by a state
commission charged with reducing school
property taxes.
The commission's sweeping cost-cutting plan
would severely target special education
services, roll back important state mandates
and leave it up to school districts to decide
how to best meet students' needs.
"In these very tough economic times we
can't leave it to school districts to choose
between providing appropriate services for
children in need and cutting dollars," said
NYSUT President Dick Iannuzzi. "We can't go
back to the era when school districts made all
the decisions: That was an era when students with
disabilities were excluded from public schools,
students didn't get the services they needed and
too many children were lost in the student
population."
NYSUT Vice President Maria Neira said the union
will work with other advocacy groups to make
sure special education students do not lose
needed services.
"These dangerous proposals would seriously
erode programs and services," she said, "and
roll back all the achievement gains that students
with special needs have made in the
last decade."
Neira noted that dramatically more students
with special needs are taking Regents Exams and
passing them. Since 2000-01, the number of
graduating students with disabilities earning
Regents diplomas has grown from 15 percent to
48 percent in 2006-07.
Gov. David Paterson, who embraced the
commission's final report at a news conference
just two weeks before he releases his proposed
state budget, said the commission focused on
special education because it is a "huge
expenditure ... we are number one in per capita
spending, in volume - yet the graduation rate
for these students is 38th in the nation."
The commission recommends a number of steps
aimed at decreasing the special education
classification rates and accelerating the
mainstreaming of students by providing students
with extra help within the general education
setting.
Classification rates vary considerably
across the state, Paterson noted, from a low of
2.2 percent to a high of 23.1 percent.
Specifically, the plan calls for removing
state-mandated pupil-teacher aide ratios and
class size requirements.
The report also says there should be no
mandatory minimum levels of special education
services such as the current minimum of two
hours per week for speech therapy.
The report suggests districts should not be
forced to go through the formal classification
process for students with milder needs.
While the commission calls for giving
additional general education aid to districts
that reduce classification rates, that would
require a significant amount of additional
state funding.
The report further proposes repealing the
burden-of-proof legislation signed into law
last year, shifting the responsibility for
determining the adequacy of a child's
Individualized Education Program to the parent.
"If this and the mandate relief proposals are
enacted, it would result in school districts
proposing minimal services for children and then
requiring parents to prove these programs
are inappropriate for their children," Neira
said.
The commission, headed by Nassau County
Executive Tom Suozzi, held hearings around the
state but failed to listen to the advocates for
students, Neira said. "They only listened to
people who wanted to cut costs, not those
speaking on behalf of the students."
Joseph Mugivan's
testimony.
Dear Mr. Suozzi,
Thank you for the opportunity to speak
at the public forum relating to saving money
for taxpayers on September 14, 2008 in the area
Special Education.
I am a teacher with the City of New
York and have worked with early childhood
education and children with special needs,
mostly learning disabled and emotional
problems.
As a former adjunct at the Graduate
School of Education at Queens College (Psychology
of the Exceptional Child) and Long
Island University, I worked with teachers on
the pedagogy of literacy development for
elementary students.
There may be significant savings for
the tax payers if we begin to examine how some
children are "prematurely" labeled with special
needs when they may not be developmentally
prepared for formal instruction.
It may not be a coincidence that 20% of
the students throughout the counties in Nassau
seems to be a uniform number and that the
system is creating special need children.
Labeling children later in their
developmental years might create the financial
savings that will bring relief to the tax
payers and the opportunity for some children to
adapt to instruction.
All learning is social and education is
considered a "social science."
Literacy develops in the context of
socialization and community. Separating a child
from this sense of community, with an
unnecessary label, is counterintuitive and may
cause problems with the children's perception
of themselves in the future. Frank Smith, the
famous literacy expert would say that all
children learn; the problem is, what are they
learning about how they are treated and how
does this affect their education?
Finland and Denmark take care in
determining that their children are old enough
for formal education. Compulsive education
begins at age 7 and there is a one year hiatus
before children are labeled with special
education and restrictive settings. These two
countries have the highest reading scores in
the world in elementary and adolescent
education respectively. Enclosed is a recent
magazine article with the same theme.
Mr. Suozzi, besides bringing savings to
the educational system you have an opportunity
to help make positive changes for children; and
realize that if we are going to "compete" in
the "21st Century." we need to be sure that our
children are developmentally prepared and
socialized and not diagnosed by a preordained
system determined by the level of available
government funding.
I am not an expert in the field of
special education, and would encourage a
specialist to review my ideas with your
committee.
Again thanks for the opportunity to
present positive educational possibilities that
may reduce wasteful spending and, possibly,
support early childhood education
— Sylvia Saunders and Joseph Mugivan
New York Teacher and Mugivan testimony
2008-12-08
INDEX OF OUTRAGES
Pages: 380
[1] 2 3 4 5 6 Next >> Last >>
