By IPNEWSGIRL

May 4, 2008 10:52 AM | Link to this

There are extreme problems with special education in Ohio. The special education programs in many of these districts are nothing more than “warehouses” where children do not receive the indivualized programs that they are entitled to under the IDEA. There are a number of law firms in Ohio that appear to have created a situation of “intimidation” so that parents realize that they cannot afford to challenge these crappy special ed programs. In the Winkelman case, the Parma district offers nothing more than a “warehouse” where children are strapped in chairs, and at best, get about 30 minutes of teacher time each day. The remainder of the day they are babysat by untrained aides. The Winkelmans, who are challenging this program, have had to face TWO law firms that have reaped over $2 million in attorney fees fighting the family. Certainly there is not a family in Ohio that can match dollar for dollar to fight this type of legal battle. Meanwhile, there are rumors that imparial hearing officers are pressured by the ODE to rule in favor of districts or risk loosing their certification as hearing officers. Take for example IHO Taich. The guy has not once ruled in favor of a child in his 20+ years as an IHO. How is it possible, when the State is cited time and time again for failing to comply with the IDEA by the Feds? Corruption! Zelman is at the helm of the ODE corruption, which involves school district attorneys, administrators, and a couple of the members of the Ohio Board of Education. Something must be done, and it appears the Gov. is the only one willing to stand up and try to affect change.

By Oldprof

March 31, 2008 10:55 AM | Link to this

Well, Classic and Dad, I guess you both only skimmed what I wrote? Dad, I guess your kid benefited from you choosing a good program for her—but 66% of the programs, as I noted, were found to have no classroom environment (e.g., “warehousing”). I note that a lack of oversight doesn’t necessarily indicate a lack of quality, and even a bad program serves some adequately—but we ought to look at the data objectively, not biased due to personal experience. The BOE is NOT practicing financial oversight—and that’s been seen again and again in overfunding of Charters (WEB Dubois) and funding snafus regarding urban districts.

By School Supporter (Classic)

March 30, 2008 11:36 PM | Link to this

dadofaspie writes, “The State has repeatedly been found in noncompliance … Parents have almost zero recourse …” Thanks. Theoretically (with money for a good lawyer) parents can get “free appropriate public education” for kids with disabilities. From dadofaspie’s comments, perhaps some districts would rather outspend parents on lawyers than provide service. (By way of explanation, years ago I read some impressive settlements, but I’ve never had visibility on district stonewalling tactics.) Thanks again, dadofaspie! Do your comments mean you agree with critics of the Policy Matters report?

By School Supporter (Classic)

March 30, 2008 10:52 PM | Link to this

David writes, “ICERD is another one of those wild UN ideas …” Regardless of your opinion of the UN, public officials with responsibility for K-12 education have a duty (under the state constitution and ICERD) to fix education. In addressing ICERD, the feds seem to be making claims that the states dodge in education adequacy litigation. This will make further affirmative action litigation interesting—for a related story: http://www.insidehighered.com/layout/set/print/news/2008/03/26/bakke

By David

March 29, 2008 5:23 PM | Link to this

ICERD is another one of those wild UN ideas. It’s time to tell the UN to find another “free” location for their headquarters.

By dadofaspie

March 29, 2008 4:13 PM | Link to this

Congress never intended to fully fund idea, but has significantly increased funding over the years. Schools should consider “fully complying” with IDEA first. The State has repeatedly been found in noncompliance, but is issued waivers from the feds. Parents have almost zero recourse; just look at the due process decisions on the ODE website, virtually 100 percent are in favor of the schools. In a recent ruling in favor of parents (Sandee Winkelman, autism case), the Parma S.D. spent over 1 million dollars fighting the parents, whose home is in foreclosure. We as parents have to fight just to get our kids accepted into a school, let alone expect results. The autism scholarship gives parents an option, whereas most schools warehouse these kids in segregated resource rooms with lowered expectations. If you want to learn about real life with autism, watch “Autism: The Musical,” currently showing on HBO. There is an autism rally at the Statehouse April 2nd, i hope DDN covers that.

By School Supporter (Classic)

March 27, 2008 11:31 PM | Link to this

Oldprof, why did Hillary Clinton allow her pet prograom (IDEA) to be underfunded? The kids in this program have considerable legal recourse; scholarships to leave underfunded systems might be a reasonable compromise. Here’s more from the March 20, Cincinnati Enquirer: “It is unbelievably successful,” said state Rep. Jon Peterson, the Delaware Republican who authored the law creating the scholarship in 2003. … Peterson said Policy Matters is heavily influenced by unions representing educators in public school districts, which lose students and funding when parents opt for the autism scholarships. … Two people running a program overseeing 150 or so private providers is not enough oversight, Policy Matters Ohio said. Peterson agrees, saying Ohio’s Education Department should get more money to expand that department. Sandy Knollman of Price Hill, parent of a third-grader in the autism program at St. William’s elementary, said … Policy Matters Ohio doesn’t know the various autism programs and providers as parents do. “I am appalled that people who don’t even use the program are making judgments about it.”

By Oldprof

March 26, 2008 11:12 PM | Link to this

New data: OBE devoted $11 million for vouchers for around 750 autistic students. OBE did not audit the use of those vouchers—oversight was provided by 2 staffers who also had other duties—and an independent audit showed that, despite parental satisfaction, 66% of the vouchers were used for programs that offered “no classroom environment” and half of them went to programs where sectarian religious instruction was required. Another thinly veiled attempt to require taxpayers to support religion in the guise of experimentation. Another example of the egregious lack of oversight and regulation from Zelman, Wick and the other apologists.

By Oldprof

March 24, 2008 10:41 PM | Link to this

What can she do to turn things around? If the “things” are Ohio’s system of public education, she can support Strickland’s reform efforts and step down politely. If the “things” are to save her job, I don’t care; Ohio doesn’t owe her a living.

By Mary

March 24, 2008 2:56 PM | Link to this

I recall an article a few years ago that pointed out Zellman’s salary exceeds the governor’s - not that I think this has anything to do with Strickland’s concerns and motivations. I wonder if the bureaucratic system, high fallutin salaries, expectations, stress, etc wipes out any visionary tendencies these high ranking bureaucrats are supposed to have. Or maybe the system chases off those with the brains and vision to do such a job. The real brains and visionaries are probably living in a cave. Maybe these state bureaucrats chomping up $200,000 salaries ought to take less money and use the savings to hire temporary assistants, malcontents, people with chips on their shoulders etc to help provide vision for the education system. I have been chipping in my two cents for free.

By null

March 24, 2008 2:55 PM | Link to this

Criticism could be levied at both Zelman and Strickland. When $100 mil had to be cut at ODE, a large portion of that was “unused special education funds.” These are federal dollars the state was not able to obligate efficiently, and were returned. Meanwhile, families are denied special ed services. The Governor, on the other hand, has been opposed to programs that promote school choice for these families.

By School Supporter (Classic)

March 24, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this

You ask, “What can she do to turn things around?” Personally, I’m looking forward to Chad Readler’s deposition of Montgomery County Democratic Party Chair Mark Owens and Governor Ted Strickland to find out how they intend to help Public Schools achieve the goals of the International Convention to End Racial Discrimination (ICERD). There are two basic plans: First is the Dr. Zelman’s way, where we invest tax dollars in the most cost-effective interventions available. Second is the K Street lobbyist way, where we elect a President to stack the Supreme Court to redefine “racial discrimination” in a manner that compels courts to consolidate urban and suburban school districts and then reassign the best teachers to the neediest students. Too bad Dr. Zelman doesn’t have the cooperation of Democratic Party leadership—no doubt her plan is what the framers of Ohio’s Constitution actually intended: in fact, the Leadership Conference for Civil Rights Education Fund showcases her plan here: http://www.realizethedream.org/promising_programs/successful-title-i-schools.html (dashes between successful title i schools). Do Governor Strickland, Attorney General Marc Dann, or Chair Owens understand their responsibilities under ICERD? Have any Ohio ed school has actually evaluated Reading Recovery to ensure it meets the cost-effectiveness threshold implicit in the Ohio Constitution ed clause?