The purpose of today's meeting was for the IEP team to discuss results of recent assessments and present the new IEP. The foster mother started out the meeting by saying that she just received word that her foster sons would be returning to their birth mother June 1st even though this student wouldn't be able to finish out the school year. I don't know much about how the system works, but she explained that it's a milestone when a child has lived with a foster family for 2 years and "the system" wants to get these boys back to their birth mother before they hit that milestone (which apparently makes it more difficult). In addition, one of the social workers on the case has heard the boys mention that they do not want to return to their birth mother and this is influenced from information they are getting from their foster family....and this means to put a rush on the change of placement. I'm not sure what sense that makes and it breaks my heart that this student and his brother will have to return to such an unstable environment. The foster mother also added that she has done all the paperwork for this student to receive SSI benefits and the birth mother is already spending the money she will get when they move back "home."
I presented my information about the student stating that he has pretty severe articulation errors likely attributed to inconsistent use of hearing aids over the years as well as inconsistent speech therapy. With regards to the language assessment, he performed within the near-average range for receptive language and nonliteral language; his weaknesses are in the areas of vocabulary and syntax. Again, most of this is likely attributed to inconsistent hearing aid use as well as excessive absences from school and what can only be assumed to be limited language stimulation outside of school.
Next, the school psychologist reported that his cognitive abilities are within the average range and most of his scores that were below the average range or within the clinically significant range were related to the diagnosis of ADHD. The team was relieved to hear that on top of everything else this student has come up against and will soon come up against, his receptive language skills and cognitive abilities are intact.
The teachers reported Woodcock Johnson scores that reveal he is performing around the mid-kindergarten level across the board academically. He cannot decode words and does not retain spelling words. When a task depends on him reading independently, we might as well count that out completely because nothing will get done correctly. As the teachers elaborate about how he is consistently on the kindergarten level, the foster mother brings up a question to the team. If we all see there are delays with communication and academic skills at about the kindergarten level, why are with supporting him to be promoted to 4th grade next year?
In reviewing his file from his many past schools, the school prior to him transferring to our school recommended he repeat 1st grade. However, with the delay in time of receiving this documentation from his previous school and the chaos with social services, the only information the school had was that this student had recently completed 1st grade. With this information, he was automatically placed in 2nd grade upon this transfer. He is now midway through 3rd grade and the school team is not recommending him for retention. Why is that?
About a month ago, all the teachers in the school were required to make a list of all the students in their class they were at least considering for retention. This student's name came up on that list that was sent to the principal and our program coordinator. I was not a part of the conversation that happened after the list was submitted, but I got some information from the classroom teacher. The result was that this particular student would not be a good candidate for retention as his foster parents are going through a lot and this would be even more of a burden on them if he was repeating 3rd grade.
What sense does that make? Since when did we make educational decisions for students based on the best interest of the parents. Don't get me wrong, this foster mother has been outstanding and has gone through hell and high water to even get to this meeting today. But my question is, where do we draw the line? This student is functioning at the kindergarten level and we are saying it's OK to put him in 4th grade with those skills?
Part of the argument is that the whole theory behind retention is that the student will "catch up" in a year's time. We all know that won't happen in this situation. And for that reason, this student isn't a candidate for retention? He's already several years behind, so let's just let him get MORE behind, huh? When the foster mother asked that very question the response was very robotic. According to the Individual's with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), students with disabilities have the option of continuing their education until the age of 21 to obtain a certificate of attendance. Since it's likely that the longer we push this child along, the less likely he will pass the dreaded state assessments (thank you, No Child Left Behind), this would probably be the path for this student.
WAIT A MINUTE!!! Didn't you just state that his student has cognitive abilities within the average range?! Since when was that a path for a student who was capable of obtaining a high school diploma? I thought we were suppose to enforce "least restrictive environments" and "leave no child behind". Someone please explain to me how this is occurring in this situation!
As I sat and listened to this conversation, I just became more and more disgusted. First of all, apparently no matter what is said at this table today, this woman will no longer be a part of this student's life in about 3 months. Second, if he is indeed changing schools next year, what's it going to hurt to have him repeat 3rd grade? He won't notice his peers are moving up a grade and he isn't; it's won't be a rough transition....at least not any rougher than the living situation transition. What are we hurting by making the recommendation of retaining him in the 3rd grade?
Maybe one more year in the 3rd grade won't make a lot of difference in this child's life, but it's the principle. What are schools and IEP teams implying by pushing a child into a grade that he/she is clearly not prepared for? Are the implications that it's OK to lower our expectations of these students and it's OK for them to be below grade level for their entire academic career? And, as school and IEPs teams of professionals who are suppose to "know our stuff" in this area, are we deceiving the parents when we convince them this is the correct plan of attack? Are we abating our responsibilities of educating these students?
Today was the first time I have ever skipped through my parts of the IEP and professionally dismissed myself from the table. I'm sure it won't be the last.
No comments:
Post a Comment