Showing posts with label Clint Zweifel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Clint Zweifel. Show all posts
Friday, April 11, 2008
Dead? Or Merely Sleeping?
An update:
Missouri’s Special Needs Scholarship tax credit legislation was recently folded into an Omnibus Education Bill on teacher pay, HB 2040/2430. Legislators debated the language about Special Needs students in an especially heated session this Wednesday. Speaker Rod Jetton’s comments allude to the incident of an altercation between Speaker Pro-Tem Steve Tilley and Representatives Trent Skaggs and Brian Nieves. I imagine it happened in a “Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves” kind of way, after reading some eye-witness reports.
Ultimately, the scholarship language was stripped from the bill via an amendment from Rep. Maynard Wallace, a former public school Superintendent.
Speaker Pro-Tem Tilley was quoted as saying that the teacher pay bill wouldn’t “see the light of day” after the loss of the scholarship tax credit language, but the cry this morning is that the bill may be resurrected. It’s a significant loss for both sides of the aisle if assistance for both teachers and special needs children cannot come to terms with one another.
We’ll see what the day brings. You've gotta admire Tilley for putting his foot down on this one.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Scholarship tax credits: extending a right
KWMU briefs on the ongoing tuition tax credit legislation:
The Missouri Senate has set aside a bill that would provide scholarships for disabled children to attend better-performing public or private schools.
It would also provide state tax breaks to private donors who fund them.
Supporters say the bill would provide more opportunity for kids afflicted with various types of disabilities to get a good education.
But State Senator Rita Heard Days (D, St. Louis) expressed concern that some kids could be worse off by switching schools.
"So often we throw things to the private entity, and we have no accountability about that process...special needs children are indeed special, and I want to make sure that wherever they're being educated that we know what they're doing, we know the situations that they're in, and we know that they are getting a proper education," Days said.
Democrats spent over two hours on Monday discussing and questioning the bill in what appeared to be a potential filibuster.
Senate Majority Floor Leader Charlie Shields (R, St. Joseph) says he hopes an agreement can be reached before the end of session.
"It falls in that category, if we can get past the emotion and get past the 'camel's nose under the tent' arguments, that there might be something that can be worked out on it," Shields said.
Opponents believe the bill is a back-door attempt to legalize private school vouchers in Missouri.
Interesting point made by Rep. Days. We do, often, for lack of a better term “thrown things at the private sector”. Things like health care, construction, food, haircuts, literature, research and development about major diseases, lawn furniture, automobiles, clothing…
It is this private sector that makes this NOT a socialist country, and while I would second her sentiment that special needs children need to be in a safe and appropriate environment, I just don’t see how the state can make that decision any better than a parent can. Right now families with special needs children face tremendous obstacles to getting the best education, and this legislation offers a very real, very viable solution. It catalyzes the philanthropic community to support special needs education specifically, and gives families the ability to take that gift and use it toward the most appropriate option for their child.
So while I understand the sentiment, I have to think, well, parents make choices all the time for their children. They choose what kind of insurance to get, they plan a diet, and they choose the most appropriate toys for their child’s age. Parents choose what daycare to go to, and what activities their child will participate in, and inherent in that is the fact that parents are qualified to make choices that affect their children. These areas of a child’s life are just as important and serious as K-12 education, and those who have the money are unrestricted and free to make that choice. While Rep. Days may care deeply and want your child to be safe and succeed, it really should be your choice as a parent with custody of a child to determine what education works best for your special needs child.
It is obvious that ALL parents DO have a right to send their child to an alternative school. They do! They may not have the money, but they have a right. The choice being made by the state on special needs tax credit is not whether parents have a right to choose another school, nor is it a decision about the quality of private schools. The choice is whether Missouri will give all parents of special needs children the choice that only some now have. They don’t have that choice because they are more qualified to make it, but because they have the finances to pay for tuition. For special needs children, tuition to specialty schools can run too high for even middle class families to afford.
If the concern is that kids will be “worse off” at a new school, then why are we not also concerned about students who are currently “worse off” at a public school that isn’t conducive to their disability?
The Missouri Senate has set aside a bill that would provide scholarships for disabled children to attend better-performing public or private schools.
It would also provide state tax breaks to private donors who fund them.
Supporters say the bill would provide more opportunity for kids afflicted with various types of disabilities to get a good education.
But State Senator Rita Heard Days (D, St. Louis) expressed concern that some kids could be worse off by switching schools.
"So often we throw things to the private entity, and we have no accountability about that process...special needs children are indeed special, and I want to make sure that wherever they're being educated that we know what they're doing, we know the situations that they're in, and we know that they are getting a proper education," Days said.
Democrats spent over two hours on Monday discussing and questioning the bill in what appeared to be a potential filibuster.
Senate Majority Floor Leader Charlie Shields (R, St. Joseph) says he hopes an agreement can be reached before the end of session.
"It falls in that category, if we can get past the emotion and get past the 'camel's nose under the tent' arguments, that there might be something that can be worked out on it," Shields said.
Opponents believe the bill is a back-door attempt to legalize private school vouchers in Missouri.
Interesting point made by Rep. Days. We do, often, for lack of a better term “thrown things at the private sector”. Things like health care, construction, food, haircuts, literature, research and development about major diseases, lawn furniture, automobiles, clothing…
It is this private sector that makes this NOT a socialist country, and while I would second her sentiment that special needs children need to be in a safe and appropriate environment, I just don’t see how the state can make that decision any better than a parent can. Right now families with special needs children face tremendous obstacles to getting the best education, and this legislation offers a very real, very viable solution. It catalyzes the philanthropic community to support special needs education specifically, and gives families the ability to take that gift and use it toward the most appropriate option for their child.
So while I understand the sentiment, I have to think, well, parents make choices all the time for their children. They choose what kind of insurance to get, they plan a diet, and they choose the most appropriate toys for their child’s age. Parents choose what daycare to go to, and what activities their child will participate in, and inherent in that is the fact that parents are qualified to make choices that affect their children. These areas of a child’s life are just as important and serious as K-12 education, and those who have the money are unrestricted and free to make that choice. While Rep. Days may care deeply and want your child to be safe and succeed, it really should be your choice as a parent with custody of a child to determine what education works best for your special needs child.
It is obvious that ALL parents DO have a right to send their child to an alternative school. They do! They may not have the money, but they have a right. The choice being made by the state on special needs tax credit is not whether parents have a right to choose another school, nor is it a decision about the quality of private schools. The choice is whether Missouri will give all parents of special needs children the choice that only some now have. They don’t have that choice because they are more qualified to make it, but because they have the finances to pay for tuition. For special needs children, tuition to specialty schools can run too high for even middle class families to afford.
If the concern is that kids will be “worse off” at a new school, then why are we not also concerned about students who are currently “worse off” at a public school that isn’t conducive to their disability?
Monday, March 31, 2008
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Two paths diverge in the wood
I went to a public school from Kindergarten through high school graduation, and received a great education. I took several honors classes and greatly benefited from them. My science teachers helped me gain an affinity for Chemistry and Physics, I took journalism classes and jewelry class; I sang and danced after school in nationally competitive choirs and learned to love government and politics.
I was very well prepared to write in college, and I felt well-prepared all around. My teachers were inspiring and challenging, so I know from experience how good public schools can be, and I wouldn’t have traded my public school for any private school. I think I was actually better prepared than some of my college mates who had gone to private schools.
So take me quite seriously when I recognize the limits of a public school. I know many students who did not excel in our public school, one in particular was my brother. He is a much more visual and auditory learner, and in recognizing the differences between us as learners I can understand that a public school that focuses on learning through reading is not always the best fit. The same can be said of special needs education. Many students will thrive with what public education has to offer, but those who are not will benefit more from an education that meets them where they are cognitively and developmentally.
My public high school offered choices. We had an adjoining program that offered lots of hands-on classes, and my brother took to culinary arts and did very well. I think his success there even motivated him to try harder at courses that were more difficult for him.
One Thanksgiving my brother made a gorgeous and delicious apple pie from scratch, which was a sort of symbol for me. I cannot bake to save my life! Even the kits where you only have to add water are a challenge—they always seem to end up burnt on the outside and raw on the inside. And I know my brother would not have that skill, which has led him to a great job in nutrition at an Alzheimer’s care facility, if he hadn’t had the opportunity to take those classes.
For all of the kids in Missouri who simply need something else, the proposed tuition tax credit scholarship for special needs students can make that happen, especially for families that cannot afford it on their own. My public school saw the benefit of offering choices and many kids really excelled because of it. It doesn’t mean that public school are bad—certainly in many cases they are amazingly proficient—it just means that schools, like the students they teach, aren’t perfect or flawless. Offering choices in education means simply that more schools can work at meeting a child’s need, and that child in turn can take his or her skills where they will be most nurtured.
I was very well prepared to write in college, and I felt well-prepared all around. My teachers were inspiring and challenging, so I know from experience how good public schools can be, and I wouldn’t have traded my public school for any private school. I think I was actually better prepared than some of my college mates who had gone to private schools.
So take me quite seriously when I recognize the limits of a public school. I know many students who did not excel in our public school, one in particular was my brother. He is a much more visual and auditory learner, and in recognizing the differences between us as learners I can understand that a public school that focuses on learning through reading is not always the best fit. The same can be said of special needs education. Many students will thrive with what public education has to offer, but those who are not will benefit more from an education that meets them where they are cognitively and developmentally.
My public high school offered choices. We had an adjoining program that offered lots of hands-on classes, and my brother took to culinary arts and did very well. I think his success there even motivated him to try harder at courses that were more difficult for him.
One Thanksgiving my brother made a gorgeous and delicious apple pie from scratch, which was a sort of symbol for me. I cannot bake to save my life! Even the kits where you only have to add water are a challenge—they always seem to end up burnt on the outside and raw on the inside. And I know my brother would not have that skill, which has led him to a great job in nutrition at an Alzheimer’s care facility, if he hadn’t had the opportunity to take those classes.
For all of the kids in Missouri who simply need something else, the proposed tuition tax credit scholarship for special needs students can make that happen, especially for families that cannot afford it on their own. My public school saw the benefit of offering choices and many kids really excelled because of it. It doesn’t mean that public school are bad—certainly in many cases they are amazingly proficient—it just means that schools, like the students they teach, aren’t perfect or flawless. Offering choices in education means simply that more schools can work at meeting a child’s need, and that child in turn can take his or her skills where they will be most nurtured.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
St. Louis Post-Dispatch article belittles parents' concerns
The Cooperating School District copied their website into an op-ed for the Post-Dispatch yesterday morning, in a bold move once again telling special needs parents what is best for their children. I really believe that parents know better than school districts, and so do they. The article was wrong on many accounts, but here’s one non sequitur that stuck in my craw. [Craw? Is that truly a word?]
After Florida enacted a plan similar to the one the Missouri Legislature is considering, the Palm Beach Post reported, more than 77 percent of the non-public schools that received funds through the program provided no special education services.
The example of St. Louis County offers an explanation. Close to 1,300 children who are enrolled in private and parochial schools in the county receive their special education services not through their own schools but through the public school system. Clearly, many non-public schools simply are unable to educate these children adequately.
That explanation is simply wrong. Florida’s McKay tax credit has grown every year as more students continue to take advantage of it, and a 2003 survey found that 93% of parents were satisfied by their new school, compared to a 33% satisfaction with the previous school. This is interesting to note: parents were three times as satisfied with their school, even though many moved to a school with no special education services. Clearly, even the private schools with the least amount of services were more satisfactory than their assigned public school.
The article then goes on to tell parents:
I attended committee hearings on these bills and heard parents testify to the critical need for assistance with early identification and intervention in helping their children. The pain of these parents was very real, and there are genuine opportunities to create public policy that would serve their children in much more positive ways. Unfortunately, some state legislators have chosen to use this real need as a way to support non-public education without even addressing the educational needs of the children.
What a slap in the face from the executive director of St. Louis’ Cooperating School Districts! I think an appropriate paraphrase is “I feel you pain, but you don’t really understand. I know better than you what kind of legislation will help your son or daughter. You’re just poor saps.”
The parents I know with special needs children typically know about as much as a medical student might, or a school administrator. They’ve been researching causes and treatments and what to expect since their child was diagnosed, and their knowledge is intensely personal since it’s an all-day, every-day behavior study with a little person they love. Parents also understand the mechanics of an IEP because they went through the process and learned about their options. I believe they are in some cases more aware of their rights than anyone else, as their child’s vulnerability heightened their vigilance.
But really, at the end of the day what matters is that if a parent is not happy with the special needs services at a public school, they have the right and ability to seek out a better alternative. A parent’s opinion matters most, and that the Cooperating School Districts don't understand that only underscores the necessity of HB 1886 and SB 993.
After Florida enacted a plan similar to the one the Missouri Legislature is considering, the Palm Beach Post reported, more than 77 percent of the non-public schools that received funds through the program provided no special education services.
The example of St. Louis County offers an explanation. Close to 1,300 children who are enrolled in private and parochial schools in the county receive their special education services not through their own schools but through the public school system. Clearly, many non-public schools simply are unable to educate these children adequately.
That explanation is simply wrong. Florida’s McKay tax credit has grown every year as more students continue to take advantage of it, and a 2003 survey found that 93% of parents were satisfied by their new school, compared to a 33% satisfaction with the previous school. This is interesting to note: parents were three times as satisfied with their school, even though many moved to a school with no special education services. Clearly, even the private schools with the least amount of services were more satisfactory than their assigned public school.
The article then goes on to tell parents:
I attended committee hearings on these bills and heard parents testify to the critical need for assistance with early identification and intervention in helping their children. The pain of these parents was very real, and there are genuine opportunities to create public policy that would serve their children in much more positive ways. Unfortunately, some state legislators have chosen to use this real need as a way to support non-public education without even addressing the educational needs of the children.
What a slap in the face from the executive director of St. Louis’ Cooperating School Districts! I think an appropriate paraphrase is “I feel you pain, but you don’t really understand. I know better than you what kind of legislation will help your son or daughter. You’re just poor saps.”
The parents I know with special needs children typically know about as much as a medical student might, or a school administrator. They’ve been researching causes and treatments and what to expect since their child was diagnosed, and their knowledge is intensely personal since it’s an all-day, every-day behavior study with a little person they love. Parents also understand the mechanics of an IEP because they went through the process and learned about their options. I believe they are in some cases more aware of their rights than anyone else, as their child’s vulnerability heightened their vigilance.
But really, at the end of the day what matters is that if a parent is not happy with the special needs services at a public school, they have the right and ability to seek out a better alternative. A parent’s opinion matters most, and that the Cooperating School Districts don't understand that only underscores the necessity of HB 1886 and SB 993.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Rep. Zwiefel's Missouri Education Promise
I had a dream the other night that I had a special needs child. He was the light of my life, but even as a young child he was not “typical” and did things that other kids and parent thought were strange. I completely understood in my dream that it was about his special personality, and not about what other people expected him to be like. I also took to heart the idea that I was his advocate, and that was going to require all of my effort to help him get through life safely—but that it would be a joyful experience and completely worth it.
I don’t have kids yet, but when I do, I think that having a special needs child would be a great blessing. I think the idea that I could have that responsibility is exciting. I know that is would be challenging: a much more real and permanent responsibility than one evening’s dream. I’m sure it will be frustrating at times, and probably the most frustrating part would be when others didn’t understand.
Having that dream made me all the more aware of how important it is that Missouri pass HB 1886. This tuition tax credit would be the difference between finding the right place for a special needs child, where his or her proclivities and needs are understood, and being trapped somewhere where that child doesn’t have the help they need, a place where they are not understood. I read recently on Rep. Clint Zweifel’s (Florissant) website about his plan to give state-funded grants for preschoolers in poverty, and he seemed very proud of the opportunity to do that. He saw there was a need there, a need for extra financial support, and made a commitment in his place of authority to help. And, with the Missouri Education Promise Act he introduced, he makes a commitment to financially assist students in college.
HB 1886 seems like just the kind of legislation that aligns with his priorities. I hope that before this vote, he takes a look at the needs of the children this would help, and sees what their parents see: a child full of potential and deserving of full-fledged support.
I don’t have kids yet, but when I do, I think that having a special needs child would be a great blessing. I think the idea that I could have that responsibility is exciting. I know that is would be challenging: a much more real and permanent responsibility than one evening’s dream. I’m sure it will be frustrating at times, and probably the most frustrating part would be when others didn’t understand.
Having that dream made me all the more aware of how important it is that Missouri pass HB 1886. This tuition tax credit would be the difference between finding the right place for a special needs child, where his or her proclivities and needs are understood, and being trapped somewhere where that child doesn’t have the help they need, a place where they are not understood. I read recently on Rep. Clint Zweifel’s (Florissant) website about his plan to give state-funded grants for preschoolers in poverty, and he seemed very proud of the opportunity to do that. He saw there was a need there, a need for extra financial support, and made a commitment in his place of authority to help. And, with the Missouri Education Promise Act he introduced, he makes a commitment to financially assist students in college.
HB 1886 seems like just the kind of legislation that aligns with his priorities. I hope that before this vote, he takes a look at the needs of the children this would help, and sees what their parents see: a child full of potential and deserving of full-fledged support.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Missouri Needs a Scholarship Program for Children with Disabilities
The Center for Disease Control estimates every 1 in 150 children are diagnosed with some form of autism. This estimate cannot account for those who are never tested, whatever the reason may be. Therefore, autism is more prevalent than we think. Most of these children can succeed with proper treatments and proper education. Unfortunately, not every school is equipped to educate these children adequately. The government passed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); that includes revisions and amendments. This act clearly says children with autism spectrum disorder should be given a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) . Some parents cannot afford to send their children to schools that are more capable of educating them, whether it is another public school, private school, or a special education school. Several other states have passed legislation that tries to solve this problem. Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Ohio, and Utah all have passed some sort of disability or special needs scholarship programs. I would like to focus on Florida’s program. The John M. McKay Scholarships for Students with Disabilities Program provides students with disabilities to attend a public school other than the one assigned, or provide a scholarship to a private school. Any student that has been given an Individual Education Plan (IEP) can apply for these scholarships.
The program does not cost the state anything. The children are awarded the amount the state would have been paying for them at their assigned school, including the costs to accommodate the disability or the cost to attend the private school, whichever is less.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
