By Chris Geden Community Outreach Director -Childrens Education Alliance of Missouri

Last night, at the Missouri History Museum, there was a round table discussion around the previously screened movie Waiting for Superman. There were about twenty people in attendance and at least twenty different opinions regarding American education and they way to reform it. Actually at times the conversation was so heated and diverse that, it felt like there where two hundred people in the room with differing ideas and perceptions about the state of education.

The crowd was diverse, there were teachers from public, private, and public charter as well as social workers and college students, education reformers, anti-reformers, and just interested citizens in attendance.  The discussion was supposed to be about the movie. However, I have learned that when you talk about education, especially education in failing school districts, everyone’s attention is quickly pulled straight to the real world examples of failure in their own backyard. The group, while having very different opinions and experiences, was able to meet in small groups to have passionate, honest, and at times heated, discussions.

The topics in these small group discussions ranged from teacher tenure, parent involvement, and the achievement gap to the Outstanding Schools Act and school choice. The manner in which people interacted with each other on these hot button issues highlighted the frustration people feel as they try to get their voices heard. I have to admit I got a little agitated when people misrepresented the facts about school choice, teacher tenure, and the Outstanding Schools Act. However, once I was able to sit back and really listen I was able to understand and appreciate that everyone comes at education reform from a different experience and perspectives. I also realized last night that if progress is going to be made, more conversations like last night’s are going to have to happen.

All in all, I found the discussion very gratifying and it was rewarding. Hopefully I was able to give some anti-reformers some things to think about. I would have liked to have seen more people there of course but for what it was a great way to spend a Wednesday evening.

In OPINION SHAPER’s entry by Carl Peterson on 6.5.11, the question is asked, “Is public education dead?”

Mr. Peterson states that Missouri education legislation (since 2002) is “saddled with school choice”, the implication being that choice is a bad thing. As a parent, wouldn’t you think that a choice of educational options was a bad thing? [NOTE: I will not address his comment on vouchers in Missouri as they are unconstitutional in this state.] By now, we know that we all learn differently, which is to say that we do not all learn the same way. So, why do we still cling to an archaic system? The ‘One-size-fits-all traditional public school model?

His opinion is that it’s a bad development that children, who are now trapped in unaccredited school districts, can now cross a border into a neighboring accredited district and attain access to a proper education. Why is this bad? Who is it bad for? It is certainly NOT bad for the children. Should not children be the focus and barometer by which we guide our ship?

I appreciate Mr. Peterson’s concern that we need to improve the schools we have and support them. The argument that the children who do not cross the border, for whatever reason, are left behind and will suffer is worthy of consideration, however, those who avail themselves of an immediate solution will benefit IMMEDIATELY. This is GOOD.

He argues that charter schools are a false hope for at-risk children and that charters do not accept the hardest to teach and the most disruptive. Not true. Some specify exactly these demographics. In fact, the best charter schools in the country rank at the top level as the top traditional schools. Just because not all charters are up to the level they need to be does not mean that we should shut them all down. Instead, we need to hold them accountable to the same standards, as our Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has called for. He also calls for charters to specialize in serving the most under-served: those with learning disabilities and those who are at-risk and who cannot be educated in the traditional public school environment. These are the children Mr. Peterson expresses concern about, rightly so. So, we should learn from examples in other cities and states that have guided at-risk students to academic attainment, in spite of their home environment, their financial disparity, etc.

I challenge his allegation that the real problem is that the charter-school/voucher debate has distracted us all from solving the real problems in education. I would suggest quite the opposite. I suggest that the failure over the last 3 decades, while doubling what we spend, to improve public education brought about the search for alternatives. Among the options discussed, and tested, across the country are not only charter schools and vouchers (though vouchers are unconstitutional in MO), but performance pay, transparency, professional development, virtual learning/education, home-schooling, open enrollment, and of course teacher tenure, to name a few options we have to work with.

Mr. Peterson’s fear that now “…St. Charles County public schools must receive students from unaccredited districts from St. Louis County,” reflects the concerns of other area counties as well: that their schools will be absolutely overflowing with transfer students. This fear fails to take into account the fact that most parents, and their children, would prefer to remain in their own community. We see that in other states when borders were opened for enrollment, there was approximately a 5% transfer (Arkansas). If there are good schools in a neighborhood, the schools will fill their seats. In the meanwhile, let the neighboring schools fill to capacity.

There is no “agenda is to raid the public treasure chest to fund…private schools.” Does Mr. Peterson recognize that the private schools are able to appropriately educate children often for LESS than what we spend on public schools? The cost per child in SLPS is almost double that of its private school counterparts in the same area. The public could actually cut costs by placing children in those schools….but again, vouchers are not constitutional in the state of Missouri…

We would all be better off by embracing those changes that have been vetted and shown success rather than all of us collectively screaming: “Before vouchers and charter schools kill public education, you will have to climb over my bloody, broken body.” I would suggest that solution borders on insanity.

“”We listened to some of the problems parents are dealing with,” Slay said, “and across the board, they had two major concerns. They were going through emotional changes after their children had been diagnosed, worrying about their future, and they also were trying to navigate a very complex educational system.”

CEAM’s financial assistance and parent training program will call for applications in April and will grant financial scholarships for tuition and therapies this summer, empowering parents to seek solutions for their special needs children who are not excelling in their current classroom environment.

As noted in the article, it is critical for parents to know their rights and how to advocate for specific individual needs of their child.  Parents, upon learning their child has a diagnoses, must navigate a very complex education system in addition to managing emotional and financial stresses.  CEAM intends to alleviate some of that stress and allow parents to focus on the educational needs of their child through education and training.

There is great demand for this kind of assistance in Missouri.  CEAM is planning benefits in support of this program this spring and we are hearing from the community that we are on the right track.  Please hold the evening of May 6th for our Kentucky Derby Party and pull out your fanciest hat!  The race is on!

The situation:  Her child, now in 3d grade, acts out in class, and though the child has been receiving A’s and B’s, she questions the merits of the reporting and fears her child is not learning.  The Mother says she knows her child can learn, but she is quite certain by now that her child has some type of learning disability.

Has this child been advanced socially so the school does not have to address the problem?  IEPs and special education can be costly and very involved.  Perhaps there is nothing nefarious and the disability has simply gone unnoticed, but it finally is catching up?  Is there a disability at all?  And if not, what exactly is the problem?  To continue punishing this child is not working.

The Mother said she requested an evaluation of the child to see if there is a learning disability over 100 days ago and has received no response.

Now, I know as a Mother that 3d grade really advances beyond the basics of the child’s prior school experiences and it is critical that the child have all the basic learning skills under their belt by 3d grade.  So, if those skills were not built, you will really begin to see problems at the 3d grade level.

Again, I must inform her that I am not an advocate.  However, I do know a few things…and a few people, like a special education specialist.  Here is what the expert said:

Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, Special Education Division

I offered other information as well, already found on our resources page that any parent starting out on the path of specialized education for their child should know,  like “What Every Parent Needs to Know About IEPs” and the US Dept. of Special Ed. IEP Guide.  A law called the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act guarantees the right to a quality education to people with learning disabilities.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a law ensuring services to children with disabilities throughout the nation. IDEA governs how states and public agencies provide early intervention, special education and related services to more than 6.5 million eligible infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities.

Most importantly, I encouraged this Mother to educate herself on her rights and to become the very best advocate for her child.  I pointed her to agencies that offer support and advocacy training and I truly hope she will work it with the school.  Then, in case she is not successful with the school, I told her about our financial assistance and parent training program.

I simply cannot wait until our prgram launches this next spring!  Then maybe I’ll know what it’s like to be Superman!!

On Thursday, I returned a call to another Mother in St. Louis city who called about her son.  They (parents) all call because of concerns about their children hoping that when I answer, I will be the one who can finally help them.  They are looking for their own ‘Superman’, just like the one who was noted missing in ‘Waiting for Superman’, the recent Davis Guggenheim documentary on public education being screened across the country, showing now in St. Louis until at least 10/28 (call to see if extended beyond that date).

I am not sure how this woman came upon CEAM and didn’t get the chance to ask.  She has no access to a computer.  Someone must’ve told her about about our financial assistance and parent training program, as I finally realized during this lengthy conversation that this woman was panicked and seeking an alternative that she now does not have.  So, what happened?

There was some kind of ruckus on the playground, preceding this call, involving a group of 16 children.  Though this woman says she has 3 witnesses affirming that her son had nothing to do with it, he has been somehow identified by his school as one of the 16 that is now facing the possibility of expulsion.  She told me her son is 11 year old, has an ADD diagnosis and an IQ of 18.  He also has no history of bad behavior.

When I shared this sad story with special education specialists (no less than 3 of them), they all winced and said either she meant that her son has an IQ of 81 or her son was not properly diagnosed.  She says she has had some parent training, but she was seeking an advocate for her child.  For if he is expelled, what will she be able to do for him?  She also said that the school’s designated representatives do not show up for her son’s IEP meetings.

I was able to make some personal recommendations based on what I know already about who in Missouri provides support, but the fact of the matter is that resources are scarce and one must be trained to advocate in this education bureaucracy.  I am not in a position to provide direct intervention and immediate consult/relief, which is what they all seek.  They are often pretty desperate by the time the calls come in.  They need help now.

All I could do was provide some phone numbers to help them find that superman and put this woman on our list to mail out applications in April when we finally launch our program.  But what about right now?  What about all those kids we will have to turn away because they do not live in the St. Louis metro area or because demand well exceeds our funds?  What about the Mother I met from Hillsboro whose 12 year old daughter with autism is sent to a state school that does not have teachers trained to advance her non-verbal child, nor an appropriate curriculum nor therapeutic services necessary?  Or the child in Union who did not receive a proper diagnosis of autism until he was in 5th grade?  I have not even met that family~a friend told me about this.  The 5th grade boy has a history of having been restrained, drugged and isolated.

I hate that I am not Superman because if I was I could swoop in and save these children by stopping that freight train that is their destiny.  I don’t want to tell anyone that Superman really does not exist.  Choice options like charter schools serving special needs learners, or open enrollment, at least for this demographic, and expanded scholarship funding would benefit these children and their families.  From a long-term perspective, society would benefit financially by advancing children to their fullest potential and independence.

On August 29 I took my children to see a music recital presented by the Lacefield Music Company.  In many ways it was like any other recital, with some participants in the beginning stages of their musical education and others with many hours and years of practice under the belts.  The difference was that every one of the musicians featured that day was on the autism spectrum and ranged in age from 8 to 38.  I was touched and amazed at the talent and commitment of these musicians as well their instructors and music therapists.

Lacefield Music Company has a special commitment to individuals on the Autism spectrum and other disibilties that they state very clearly in their mission statement:

“To provide a place where anyone, Regardless of age or musical experience or ability, could fulfill a lifelong dream of learning to play a musical instrument as well as a place, to purchase top quality instruments, operating with a sense of corporate responsibility placing customer service at the top of its priorities list.”

I had the opportunity to briefly meet Cathy Krubsack, President of Lacefield Music and grandmother to a child with autism.  In 1995 Cathy and her son opened a store in St. Louis that would help them fulfill this mission, offering opportunities for anyone, regardless of ability, to enjoy music and learn how to play an instrument.

Music is and always has been a part of daily life in my household.  My children freely play instruments and break into song at will in our house, in the car, in the grocery store, and sometimes during performances at recitals.  Although I am a music teacher and taught piano for many years we have been looking for a place just like Lacefield to start formal instruction for Ben in piano and voice.  Music opens up many pathways socially and emotionally as well as in language and other areas of development for all children and for some children on the spectrum.  Ben struggles with speech and language, but give him a song that he likes to sing and the words just flow from him.  In fact, Ben has been known to sing a song beginning to end after only having heard it one time.  He has also exhibited an understanding of intervals on the piano in the same manner after hearing a song on television and then going to the piano and playing the melody after finding the first note.  This is pretty amazing considering his struggles with his studies in school.  It is my belief that the investment of time, effort, and money in a music program for Ben will enhance the other areas of study and life for him.

Once soccer has ended this fall we will begin piano and voice lessons and I will keep you posted as to Ben’s progress, unless he decides on a different instrument.  Last week he said he wanted to play a saxophone and this summer he said he wanted to play the fiddle.  It seems that in many ways my kiddo is quite typical and I am sure that at some point drums and/or the electric guitar will appear on his horizon of interest.

Sally Oelzen

[NOTE:  Here is a video of one of the musicians, Darrius Roberts, featured at the Lacefield recital:]

I know from speaking to other parents in St. Louis as well as in other cities, and states for that matter, that not everyone has the same experience that we have had with our IEP team. One big difference I have noticed is that not all parents know what is available to them and their child and unless you have a good IEP leader, teacher, counselor, and sometimes even an advocate you may not get the information that you don’t even realize you need. The relationship I have forged with my IEP team members has been one of the key components to Ben’s success for three reasons: One, the team’s genuine desire to provide the best possible learning environment and tools possible for Ben (and others); two, continuous communication throughout the school year with Ben’s team, not just at IEP meetings; and, three, the teams knowledge and willingness to impart information about opportunities offered outside of the school to enhance Ben’s education. I think, if a team is unwilling to look outside of what is available at that particular school, that is a big red flag.

My son does not go to his home school in our district because it does not have a language center-based classroom, but thankfully another school in the district does. Unfortunately, this is not the case in all districts for all families but the cost of moving to a different school district or a private program is not merely prohibitive but for some impossible. It is my understanding that if it is determined that a child’s IEP specifies a need for a service in school that the school is required to provide it. This may be true, but if the child needs a language center-based program, for example, and the school district doesn’t have one then the IEP will reflect the next best thing and the school district will do what they can to provide it and that will have to be good enough. I can tell you from my point of view that ‘next best thing’ and ‘good enough’ doesn’t cut it when you are racing to get as much into and out of our child while their window of opportunity is still open.

Sally Oelzen, Center Director
SallyO Music Together
St. Louis, Missouri
www.sallyomusictogether.com

Program Description

Pilot program launching soon, check back for details.

Introduction:

The Children’s Education Alliance of Missouri’s (CEAM) Financial Assistance and Parent Training Program is the first of its kind in the country. The program will provide grants directly to parents of children with special needs requiring Individualized Education Plans or ‘IEPs’, enabling them the choice of schools and organizations that deliver the best special needs education and therapeutic services in St. Louis City and St. Louis County. Schools and organizations will be invited to participate by referring families in need.  Grants will distribute funds in the form of needs-based scholarships and financial assistance for therapies and will provide certificates for payment for services from approved outside providers delivered outside of the school.

Funds may not be used for any other purpose than tuition and therapy assistance. These funds will follow the child(ren) through 8^th grade provided the family re-qualifies financially during school registration each spring, continues to reside in St. Louis City or St. Louis County, maintains their portion of tuition payments and the student maintains good standing in the school.  Grant recipients will receive a 3-year commitment of support, with the ability to re-apply after the 3d year allowing support to follow the child through the 8^th grade year.

Additionally, CEAM will offer individualized learning specialists to train parents to become advocates for their child’s education and therapies. Services will be provided at no cost to any Missouri parent who requests it, regardless of whether or not their child is a recipient of the financial aid program.  Trainings, hosted by our learning specialists, will be offered through two group parent orientations per year, quarterly 3-week training sessions that educate parents on IDEA, IEP process, the differences between public and private education and monthly one-hour support seminars for issues that develop with parents, families and schools.

Statement of Need:

After extensive research, face-to-face surveys and discussions with leading educators in the St. Louis metro area, we have found that the greatest need for financial assistance is in the special needs community, and the greatest opportunity for impact is with children in middle school (grades 6-8).

Missouri is home to over 133,000 IEP students.  CEAM receives calls on almost a weekly basis from parents who are dissatisfied with their child’s educational situation and are seeking alternatives.  These parents cannot afford an alternative option and remain trapped in the failing situation. Though any child with an IEP is eligible to apply for this scholarship program, it is known that a significant increase in diagnoses of autism alone threatens to overwhelm our school systems.   Here are some statistics related to just autism:

• The National Autism Association estimates that the divorce rate is 80% for parents of autistic children.
• Statistics show the lifetime cost of caring for a person with autism, including medical care, is between $3 million and $5 million.
• Cost of lifelong care can be reduced by two thirds with early intervention
• Bankruptcy rates are higher than the national average, 1 in every 1,100 households in January 2010
• Currently, 1 in 91 children are diagnosed on the autism spectrum (formerly 1 in 150, up until 2009; 1 in 10,000 in the early 1990s)
• 4:1 ratio of boys to girls (1 in 58 boys)
• Fastest growing developmental disability
• More than $100 billion in estimated annual costs nationally
• In ten years, the annual costs are projected at $200 billion to $400 billion.
• More children will be diagnosed with autism this year than cancer, diabetes, Downs Syndrome and AIDS combined.

And now he enters the world prepared to pursue his full potential.  A very happy story.  Can’t wait to see what he does!

(Click here to see full article)

Jefferson City, Mo – infoZine – Commissioner of Education Chris L. Nicastro said that she will recommend that the State Board of Education take action in August to formally adopt a new set of “common core” academic standards which were released nationally.

The Common Core State Standards were officially released this morning by the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). The standards establish clear and consistent goals for learning that will prepare America’s children for success in college and work.

The item earning the most attention at the beginning of the session is the issue of open enrollment. Open enrollment is a policy that allows students to transfer to a school in a district outside of where the student lives, so long as the receiving district has the capacity for the student. This policy could be beneficial to parents seeking to move their child from a failing school district to a higher performing one. Many parents are also frustrated by being assigned to a school based on zone boundaries, often decades old, when they have a school in another district much closer to their home.

The Joint Committee on Education conducted a study on the issue in the interim session, hearing from parents and advocacy groups who were in favor of open enrollment and school administrators and teacher union representatives who were opposed. The main opposition was over one of the four areas of special education, transportation, funding and planning for capacity. But, the study released by the committee shows that almost all 14 states studied have policies that deal with these topics. Senator Rob Meyer has filed an open enrollment bill this session. The bill was referred to the Senate Education Committee but has not yet been scheduled for a hearing.

The Children’s Education Alliance has previously discussed how open enrollment can benefit special needs students. In addition to being able to move their child to a district with better services, the parent would also be able to find a district that practices policies that a parent believes is best for their child. For example, I had a conversation recently with the organizer of an anti- seclusion website in Missouri, and she was very interested in open enrollment. She explained that she pulled her autistic child out of her zone district and is now homeschooling due to the district’s policies on seclusion and restraint. She also cited Missouri as being one of the few states that still allows districts to use corporal punishment on students. She would like to take part in this policy so she could look for a public school district close to her who has better policies on these issues.

There are few scholarship programs that exist for special needs students, especially if you are in a high school grade level. While there are financial assistance programs for early intervention of younger students, they are usually focused on a few specific disabilities and are limited in the scope of what the assistance will cover. The dollar amount of these programs is usually not enough for a parent to remove their child from a school district and place them in private services.

A common piece of advice that a parent receives is to call an IEP meeting to review their child’s goals and the progress toward those goals. The IEP is the Individualized Education Plan that is put together for a special needs student outlining goals for that individual student’s education, and how they will be met. Parents who call our office report their frustration with the IEP process. They state that no one in the meeting is on their side and education terms are not clearly defined. The overall feeling is that they are railroaded into the plans put together by the teachers or agencies in the meeting and have very little input. Meetings called by a parent to review a struggling student’s IEP often begins with a long delay in even holding the meeting and ends with the student’s little progress being excused away. The parent eventually gets tired of fighting this system and begins to seek a way to remove their child from the district that is failing them.

When a parent begins on this road, they quickly find that it is very difficult to move their child. In St. Louis and Kansas City, public charter schools may be one option. Unfortunately, there are no charter schools that focus only on special needs. The main roadblock to this is that, per Missouri’s charter school law, students must be admitted by a lottery process and not screened in any way before entry. It remain to be seen if a charter school in St. Louis or Kansas City built for special needs students would be successful solely based on the thought that only parents of special needs students would apply to a lottery for their school. According to the Center for Education Reform, there are 85 special needs charter schools in the country, mostly in Florida and Ohio. Even if these schools were to open in St. Louis and Kansas City and be successful, what option does a parent outside of those two districts have? Missouri is the only state in the country that has a geographic cap on charter schools. This cap limits charter schools to opening only inside of the St. Louis and Kansas City Public School districts. The schools can also only accept students who live in these districts.

Parents who call our office usually know that the law requires a free, appropriate public education to be afforded to their child. Therefore, they ask “can’t I just transfer my child to another district with better services?” The answer is unfortunately “no.” This ideal is called open enrollment and Missouri has yet to join the 40 other states in the country who have some form of open enrollment. Open enrollment simply allows parents to transfer their child to a school outside of their assigned district if the receiving district has room. For more on open enrollment, check out our previous post on how open enrollment would help special needs students.

Parents also call in and ask if there are special schools in their district only for special needs students. Twenty three districts contract with Special School District (SSD) of St. Louis County, who operates five special education schools. This leaves 500 districts in the state of Missouri without this option. Parents also report to us the difficulty of getting their child moved into SSD. One parent reported their child being suspended 11 times in the current school year before the district would discuss SSD as an option. According to the parent, this child was on an IEP the previous year and had far fewer behavioral incidents, but was removed from an IEP in the current school year, against the parent’s wishes.

The bottom line in all of these stories is that the parents of the 133,000 Missouri children with IEPs have very few options when they feel the assigned local district is not able to meet the needs of their child. Implementing real education reforms in Missouri will have a positive impact on special needs families. Open enrollment, charter school expansion and scholarship tax credit programs are all good ways to give parents options when their assigned local districts are not educating their children. Districts should look at this recent United Supreme Court case as evidence that the law gives parents great powers when seeking the appropriate education for their child. Districts should jump on board for reforms, or risk paying for children to go to specialized schools, even without their consent. Furthermore, having options will help these children on a path to become productive members of society. Isn’t that what everyone should be working toward?

In some cases, as Meta, MO mother Lois Wankum testified to the committee at their October 20th hearing, students are much closer to a school in an adjacent district than the one to which they are assigned. In other cases, parents are simply looking to remove their child from a failing school district and enroll them in ones that are better performing. For many special needs parents this policy could unlock the doors of educational opportunity for their child that is trapped in a district that does not have the appropriate services to help their child.

Open enrollment would allow for these parents, who often do not have the means to send their child to a private education service such as TouchPoint or Giant Steps, to move their child to a district that may have better services. For example, the Rockwood School District in suburban St. Louis County gave an excellent presentation on their special needs services at the St. Louis meeting of the Interim Committee on Autism Spectrum Disorders. At the same hearing a mother gave desperate testimony on how her autistic child was having many problems in his local school district and she could not afford to send her child to a specialized private school. “I am drowning here” was the phrase that she repeated over and over. Why should her head continue to be held under water by outdated school district lines? Why should these district lines trap her son in the boundaries of receiving an ineffective education instead of receiving a possible lifeline of intervention leading to a productive, healthy life?

A study in Minnesota, one of 25 states that have open enrollment, shows that “the families of special-needs students are increasingly using the open-enrollment option and are satisfied with their choices.” This same option could be a reality for the families of 133,000+ IEP students in the state of Missouri, should the state choose to allow this policy. These families are not concerned with outdated school boundaries, only with seeing that their child has the best possible education options, and thus the best chance for leading a productive life.

I felt the desire to write about the challenge of matching students with texts this week after a conversation I had with an 8th grade male student, Nick. To give you a little background on this student, Nick is an avid reader and enjoys reading science fiction and fantasies. I built a good relationship with him last year because I had the first three books of the Artemis Fowl series and I allowed him to borrow each book for as long as he wanted. This particular series of books is popular among boy readers because it offers a suspenseful plot that incorporates a devious young boy, Artemis, whose sole occupation is plotting extravagant criminal activities. Anyway, Nick came to me during passing period to see if I had any extra copies of the first Artemis Fowl book. He told me that he had two other friends who were interested in reading the book with him during the school day. When I first heard Nick’s idea, I was obviously thrilled. Here I had an 8th grade boy who wanted to start a book club of sorts with his peers!

It is a well-known fact, among teachers and researchers, that adolescent boys are most at-risk of falling behind academically. I have seen this occur in my own classroom, as I have an entire class of boys who are at least three years behind in reading levels. I immediately told Nick that I had an extra copy of Artemis Fowl and that I would talk to his advisory teacher to see if we could have the boys meet in my room once a week. Nick was so excited about our plan that he brought his two friends–with the Artemis Fowl book in tow–to my room at the end of the day. Within a few minutes, I had a group of boys reading aloud to each other and giving different voices to each character. What was unique about this set-up is that Nick, the avid reader, was actively supporting and encouraging his friends who are lower level readers.

While it is not always possible to bring a group of self-motivated boys together to read a story, I do think that my conversation with Nick reveals a few important points. First, it is important for us teachers to offer an array of books; kids need to feel empowered to choose a book that is interesting to them. Next, it is essential that these kids feel successful while reading the book on their own. For instance, when Nick read Artemis Fowl aloud with his friends, he used his skills as a fluent reader to help his peers sound out difficult words and add expression to their voices. Even though Nick’s friends are considered to be struggling readers, they felt successful because a peer was showing them “the ropes” of reading, so to say. I hope to continue to facilitate Nick and his friends reading of Artemis Fowl this quarter, and plan to post updates on how this group of boys progresses. If all goes well, I would like to implement a similar peer reading group among my own struggling readers!

I first heard about Teach For America while I was a junior at the University of Wisconsin—Madison, and I joined the corps right after I graduated in 2008. I live and work with fellow corps members who hail from around the country: Texas, Ohio, California, Florida, Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota, and several native Saint Louisans, just to name a few. Even though our backgrounds are diverse, we are united with a common mission to end educational inequality by providing a quality education to all our students.

I grew up in Holmen, Wisconsin, just ten minutes north of La Crosse and about seven hours north of Saint Louis along the Mississippi. When I’m not teaching or writing, I enjoy cheering for the Badgers’ football and basketball teams, running, and exploring all that the city of Saint Louis has to offer. I hope you will continue to check back to our columns and learn more about what is happening in education!

www.teachforamerica.org

“Consistent with our decisions in [School Committee of] Burlington [v.Department of Education of Massachusetts] and [Florence County School District No. 4 v.] Carter,” Justice Stevens wrote, “we conclude that IDEA authorizes reimbursement for the cost of private special-education services when a school district fails to provide a [free, appropriate public education] and the private-school placement is appropriate, regardless of whether the child previously received special education or related services through the public school.”

The ramifications of this decision could be felt for years to come as parents now have a precedent at the highest court in the land forcing public schools to pay for a student to transfer to a private school when the parent alone felt the transfer was necessary. This case revolved around the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), but could be a sign of what the future holds for education reform. If this case clearly stated that no longer do students with disabilities have to be trapped in schools that are failing to meet their educational needs, how long before the court sets the same precedent for ALL public school students?

Many of these families could be helped at no cost to the school districts if their state legislatures would pass legislation allowing for scholarship tax credit programs. A successful example of these programs can be found in Florida, andIndiana recently passed legislation creating a scholarship tax credit program. Sadly, the Missouri House of Representatives deafeated legislation creating a program targeted at special needs students during the 2008 session. The same bill was filed during the 2009 session, but was never voted on after a committee hearing.

Undoubtedly, the floodgates will open for families who, for years, have battled with their school district for their special needs child to receive a free, appropriate public education as prescribed by law. The challenge, and duty, now of everyone in the education reform movement is to make parents of special needs children aware of this Supreme Court decision. We can no longer allow for these children to be trapped in failing and inadequate school districts.

For this reason, i am proud to say that the Children’s Education Alliance attended the St. Vincent’s Annual Christmas Party. It was heartwarming to see the alumni of St. Vincent’s recount their stories and reminisce about their time at St. Vincent’s. This event raised money for the current residents of the home and I hope to have a full account soon of the amount of money raised so that St. Vincent’s can continue their mission of providing service to those in dire need of help.