Interview on autism.change.org - 2

By Dora Raymaker
Thursday I posted Jennifer Parker's take on why it can be difficult for students on the autistic spectrum to get academic accommodations. Now with more of her attorney hat on, I've asked Jennifer some questions more about the legal and self-advocacy side of academic accommodations at the primary and secondary school level.

Dora: Give me a brief summary of the laws that govern special education and public school accommodations.

Jennifer: Section 504 is a civil rights law that allows medical and classroom accommodations for children with disabilities who do not require special education services. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ensures that all children with disabilities have a free appropriate public education that emphasizes education that meets their unique needs.

Dora: What is the most common legal issue people face with the special education system? Why might this be so? How do you think might this be addressed more globally so it's no longer an issue?

Jennifer: There are four common categories of disputes: eligibility, failure to provide a free, appropriate education (FAPE), failure to implement the IEP, and inappropriate discipline. In my personal experience as an attorney and advocate, eligibility issues are often caused by the school district's attempt to keep numbers down. It looks bad if the district has a high number of children in special education. Also, it can be expensive for the local district since IDEA is underfunded. Inappropriate discipline has several roots. Either the school staff do not understand how the child's disability affects behavior, or the school is not adequately trained in Functional Behavior Assessment/Behavior Plans, or corporeal punishment has been used for years and is entrenched in the school system. I have a case right now where a child has a wonderful IEP with every service and need explicitly outlined in his IEP, but the school is just not implementing it. They have told the parent to go ahead and file a due process complaint against them. Sometimes parents will see brazenness like this because the deck is stacked against the parent in these situations: the parent lacks resources or knowledge about filing for due process, school attorneys have trained the administrative law judges, judges rule for the school a high percentage of the time. In order to address these problems, there needs to be more oversight and monitoring by the U.S. Department of Education and full funding of IDEA.

Dora: I am going to switch topics slightly from the parent perspective to the student. A barrier to self-advocacy I've seen is people aren't taught what their rights are, legally. The IEP or 504 processes always seemed like a great way to start teaching people their rights. Is the IEP/504 process ever used that way? Should it be?

Jennifer: The student has a right to attend the IEP or 504 meeting and I highly recommend they do so if they are of an appropriate age for the subject matter of the meeting. It is a great way to learn about the process and self-advocate. Schools don't always invite the student, however, or model productive discussions... Perhaps it's happening in some schools or some districts, but working in the Mid-South, I see some schools hold meetings (illegally) to decide the fate of a child without even inviting the parent. However, I'm a proponent of training school teams to include students in this process and if I were involved with policy or oversight of the special education system it would be a priority for me. I believe that the quality of Individualized Education Plans would be greatly enhanced by input from the student. That's a no-brainer. In the mean time, I encourage students to read as much as they can about education law and either teach themselves or draw from advocacy training offered in the community.

Dora: Considering how old school-as-a-system is in the US, how long do you think it will take to change? What do you think is needed to facilitate that change?

Jennifer: Part of this process will depend on who is chosen to be Deputy Secretary of Education in the Obama Administration. The Deputy Secretary oversees the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. Linda Darling-Hammond is currently rumored to be a candidate for this position and many progressive reformers, myself included, are rooting for this appointment. (You can sign a petition to appoint Linda Darling-Hammond to a top DOE position on the Education cause blog). It will also depend in some part on the ability of citizens to bring the issues to the forefront and to change some conventional wisdom about education, accountability, and reform... the good news is I don't think we need to start from scratch with special education law. The law is excellent, the problem is the delivery system. I do believe strongly, however, that we need to scrap No Child Left Behind and just reauthorize ESEA while educators work on developing a better school accountability system.

Interview on autism.change.org

By Dora Raymaker
I posted what I thought was mostly a fluff piece on teachers arguing that accommodations are not part of the "real world", and got such interesting discussion from y'all that I was inspired to learn more. Since I'm no expert on the special education system in the U.S., I pinged Clay Burrell over at the Education blog. Clay in turn introduced me to his special education expert, Jennifer Parker. I got pretty excited about Jennifer who not only has specific expertise working with students with invisible disabilities (including autism), but is also a special education attorney. So I hit Jennifer up for more than one interview. Here's the first, continuing the themes that were explored in the "real world" post--why can it be so hard to get seemingly simple accommodations from teachers? Is this a problem with individual teachers, with teacher education, with the educational system, with--with what?

Dora: People often report high variability in their experiences with teachers. What reasons do you think there may be for this variability?

Jennifer : I think the main reason for this variability is in the training of the teachers. Generally, most "regular education" teachers report having little to no preparation for working with students who have special needs. Another reason for variability is comfort level with making accommodations and perhaps experience with working with children with disabilities. Unfortunately, schools do not usually have school-wide policies for IEPs or any uniformity in this area.

Dora: Do you think that current emphasis on standardized testing and curriculum-based structures makes it harder to meet the needs of students who don't learn in conventional ways?

Jennifer: Absolutely. I have become a strong advocate for progressive reform in education away from high-stakes standardized testing towards individualized instruction because I have personally seen the negative impact that testing and scripted curriculum has had upon our students, especially those students in poorer districts. The current emphasis is a one-size-fits all system that does not meet the needs of any of our students and makes school a very un-engaging, stressful environment for everyone. Currently schools are so afraid of being labeled a "failing" school by not meeting AYP under No Child Left Behind that every resource goes toward teaching to the test. I have been appalled by how many IEP meetings I've gone to where the special education teacher has told me that we could not create our own learning goals or accommodations, but rather, had to use the standards-based goals used for every other child in that grade. No Child Left Behind has created a system that is in direct opposition to students who don't learn in conventional ways.

Dora: Do you think there are problems getting accommodations [like working on green paper or extra time on tests] for students on the autistic spectrum that students with other disabilities don't have? Of so, what are they?

Jennifer: Well, that's a good question, since working with green paper instead of white is not a costly accommodation. Also, more time on tests is free! I think parents who run into difficulties getting these types of accommodations are running into one of two things. Either the IEP team needs more education regarding the disability and need for those accommodations or - and this seems silly since, as I just stated, these are easy accommodations - this is a school district that is very rigid. I run into this now as an advocate. I serve three states. The city school system where I live is great about accommodations, but some of the suburban school districts are very rigid and refuse to make even small accommodations. These are school districts that have good reputations and good "report cards", and feel that they know best how to educate students and they do not waiver from their way. As I mentioned earlier, they have their own customs and culture. Also, they have a school attorney who tells them not to budge an inch.

Dora: What general advice would you give to parents and students on the autistic spectrum for better getting academic accommodations with minimal fuss?

Jennifer: In general, I would take advantage of any local workshops on advocacy and learn to become a strong advocate for yourself or your child. These may be hosted by protection and advocacy organizations, education attorneys/advocates, hospitals, or autism organizations. If parents and students do not have a copy of "From Emotions to Advocacy" by attorney Pete Wright, they need to get a copy right away. This book's title is dead on: it teaches parents and students to move from an emotional state regarding their educational and developmental needs to a strong advocate state.

Dora: I've heard a lot of good things about writghtslaw.com too, do you recommend that site?

Jennifer: Yes, it is Pete Wright's site. You can order any of his publications from the site, write in questions, peruse a library of articles on all kinds of topics, and see a listing of workshop locations. The only negative that I've found is that it's a very "crowded" site and a little difficult to navigate, but it is a wealth of information and support.

The Intent of the Ninety-fourth US Congress

Originally posted at change.org

Members of the Ninety-fourth United States Congress took notice of the facts and rulings in PARC and Mills. Congressional response included an investigation into the status of all children with disabilities. After an investigation and hearings, Congress enacted Public Law 94-142, originally titled Education for All Handicapped Children Act and later reauthorized and renamed Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA 2004).

As noted in the United States Code Congressional and Administrative News 1975 (USCCAN), Congress introduced the legislation in response to

…landmark court cases establishing in law the right to education for all children [Mills and PARC] … In 1954, the Supreme Court of the United States [Brown v. Board of Education] … stated “In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education.”

The investigation yielded valuable data about the numbers of children not receiving an appropriate education. Congress found that, out of 8 million children with disabilities, only 3.9 million were receiving appropriate education. 4.25 million children were either receiving no education or inappropriate education.


USCCAN reported Congress’s findings on the social and economic costs of failing to educate all children:

The long-range implications of these statistics are that public agencies and taxpayers will spend billions of dollars over the lifetimes of these individuals to maintain such persons as dependents…With proper education services, many would be able to become productive citizens, contributing to society instead of being forced to remain burdens…

It should not … be necessary for parents throughout the country to continue utilizing the courts to assure themselves a remedy….



In 1975, the Ninety-fourth US Congress enacted the Education for All Handicapped Act. After several reauthorizations, IDEA now requires states, school districts, and schools to ensure that

All children with disabilities ages 3 through 21 receive a free, appropriate public education that meets their unique needs, regardless of the type or severity of their disability.


Children with disabilities be educated in the least restrictive environment possible….


Each student with a disability is to have an Individualized Education Program (IEP) that describes the education and related services to be provided to that student.

Parents of students with disabilities have the right to notification, informed consent, due process, and involvement in key decisions…


Federal grants are authorized to help pay state and local costs associated with implementing IDEA mandates and serving students with disabilities.

I think of IDEA as an amazingly progressive piece of legislation which codified a 180- degree turn around in conventional wisdom regarding the educability of disabled children. It is a generally well-written act (although it has highly litigated terminology, such as what is an “appropriate” education) that ensures parents important and fair rights. However, there have been obstacles in the implementation of IDEA that I believe have kept the act from fulfilling congressional intent.

The National Council on Disability (NCD) (http://www.ncd.gov), whose mission is “to provide a voice in the Federal Government and to Congress for all people with disabilities in the development of policies and delivery of programs that affect their lives”, published “Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Reauthorization: Where Do We Really Stand?” in 2002. For this publication, NCD solicited public responses to questions about four areas identified as critical to the implementation of IDEA: eligibility and over representation of minorities; funding; monitoring and enforcement; and discipline. In the introduction NCD notes:

From the students, we hear the reality of their lives in special education. In most cases, the comments we received from them are a scathing indictment of the implementation of IDEA.


I’ve read through the public comments published in “Where Do We Really Stand,” and all of them are poignant and significant, but one stands out for me as a clear, objective summary:

The findings … were a confirmation and documentation that the statute is strong, but implementation and enforcement are thin and inconsistent. This study confirmed what children with disabilities and their families have repeatedly told NCD, namely, that too many students (1) did not receive FAPE [Free, Appropriate Public Education]; (2) were inappropriately placed in separate settings; (3) did not receive appropriate services whenserved in regular classrooms; (4) had not been able to access critical transition services and supports; (5) were not provided with related services such as speech therapy, physical therapy, or psychological counseling as reflected in their IEPs. And, (5) did not receive the benefits of procedural safe-guards and protections in evaluation in some states.

What are your experiences with IDEA? And check out the chart below that compares the yearly appropriation of IDEA funds with “full funding”. How many of the above inadequacies would be relieved by full funding?

Origins of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

Originally posted at change.org

I have the great fortune to be an education advocate for chronically ill children. It's rewarding and frustrating work that combines my public school teaching experience with my legal background as an attorney for parents of children who happen to have special needs.

Every week I talk to parents about the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, federal laws that entitle children with disabilities to a free, appropriate public education. Most of the parents I work with have not heard of these legislative acts or want to know more about them. I look forward to helping guide this community through discussions on IDEA and special education in general. But before we get there, let's go back a few years. Just a few - because to discuss where we are, we need to examine where we've been.

Before 1975, when Congress passed the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, later reauthorized and renamed Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, a child deemed "uneducable" could be (and often was) legally barred from entering public school in most states. Uneducable children were children who were - or who were thought to be - mentally deficient, "crippled," blind, deaf, "defective," "delinquent," epileptic, or "diseased" .

By the time the Education for All Handicapped Children Act was enacted, four out of every five disabled children were denied access to education in U.S. public schools. A majority of these children were institutionalized. In New York State, children declared mentally retarded were institutionalized at Willowbrook State School, an institution located on Staten Island that gained notoriety in the 1960s for conducting a controversial medical study. In this study, healthy inmates were inoculated with hepatitis by injection or orally - by being forced to eat infected feces.By the 1970s, dire conditions caused by lack of staffing and resources led a few doctors and parents of patients at Willowbrook to picket the administration building. Their activism led the local newspaper, the Staten Island Advance, to cover conditions in the institution. A few months later, a local news station sent fledgling reporter, Geraldo Rivera, to cover the controversy. Using a stolen key, Rivera brought a hand held camera into Willowbrook and filmed a video expose of conditions inside the school.

According to the New York Times' Celia Dugger:
Beginning in the late 1940's, Willowbrook offered a mean, often desperate existence to thousands of mentally retarded people. By 1962, there were 6,200 people there, 2,000 more than its capacity. The complex was overcrowded and drastically understaffed. As many as 60 extremely disabled people were packed into one big locked room during the day, for years on end, with only a few attendants to supervise.

Neglect was endemic. There were not enough chairs, so residents lay on the floor or in cribs. And there were not enough clothes, so they often wore rags or nothing at all.
Many could not feed themselves, and the shortage of workers meant residents often did not eat properly. The lack of supervision also allowed unchecked violence among the bored, despairing residents.

Conditions such as these were not unique to Willowbrook. In 1971, the Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children (PARC) filed a federal class action suit against the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on behalf of mentally retarded children, aged 6 to 21, who were excluded from Pennsylvania public schools. PARC did not go to trial, but a federal trial court endorsed a consent agreement between the parties. In language later echoed by IDEA, the consent agreement stipulated that no mentally retarded child could be excluded from public school without due process and that Pennsylvania school districts had to provide these children with a free and appropriate public education.

In a second landmark federal case, Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia (1972), the court entered a judgment in favor of the Washington D.C. class of children classified as being behavior problems, mentally retarded, emotionally disturbed, and hyperactive, and who were excluded from school. The judgment stated that lack of funding could not be a reason for refusing service to students, a tenet which still exists under IDEA.

Parent activism, the formation of associations for various disabilities, state legislation, and landmark federal judicial decisions, including PARC and Mills, all led to the enactment of IDEA three years later. They stand as proof that action can lead to results.

As I've said, my direct experience with IDEA has been as an attorney and advocate. I'm hoping that those with diverse experiences (special education teachers, parents of children covered by Section 504 or IDEA, administrators, etc) will share their stories below, or if privacy is preferred, through a personal message. I hope to help guide this community's discussion of special education partially through the use of personal stories, mine plus those shared with me, that speak to the complexities, strengths, and weakness of special education law and policy.
Let me just close by saying how happy I am to see this community forming, and to help it along. Hats off to Change.org for knowing how to, well - org(anize) Change!

Photos: Willowbrook 1 (Source)Willowbrook 2 (Source)Willowbrook 3 (Source)
Comments (5)
Edit

Bush on War Against Children: "Stay the Course"

Cross-Posted on DailyKos


Yesterday Bush helicoptered in to General Phillip Kearney Elementary School in Philadelphia to declare both Mission Accomplished and Stay the Course in the "last policy address" he will give as president. All that was missing was his flight suit as George W. Bush declared: “Now is not the time to water down standards or to roll back accountability.”


According to Education Week's 1/8/09 piece, the goal of Bush's speech was to bolster his "legacy on education" and to urge the renewal of the souless, high-stakes corporate legislative act "No Child Left Behind".

"As president of the United States, this is the last policy address I will give," Mr. Bush said Thursday morning at General Philip Kearny Elementary School, a K-8 school in the Philadelphia district, on the seventh anniversary of his signing of the federal education law. "What makes it interesting is that it’s the same subject of my first policy address as president of the United States, which is education and education reform. I hope you can tell that education is dear to my heart. I care a lot about whether or not our children can learn to read, write, and add and subtract."

Whether children "can" learn to read and write?! Of course they can, you imbecile. But no one wants to anymore under your draconian testing nightmare that sucks the love of learning out of 7 year olds. And you "care alot"?!

I call bullsh*t. Bullsh*t, Mr. Bush. You "care a lot" about giving your acquaintances lucrative edu-biz contracts. You "care a lot" about vouchers. You "care a lot" about bashing teacher unions. But you most definately do not care a lot about children and their schooling.

In response to the thousands and thousands of real parents, educators, and students that have voiced their concern and opposition to No Child Left Behind, he throws up his middle finger and says with sarcasm:

I’ve heard every excuse in the book why we should not test—‘Oh, there’s too many tests; you teach the test; testing is intrusive; testing is not the role of government,’" the president said. "How can you possibly determine whether a child can read at grade level if you don’t test? And for those who claim we’re teaching the test, uh-uh. We’re teaching a child to read so he or she can pass the test."

Oh, Mr. Bush we progressive reformers have been bad boys and girls! How dare we question the psychological impact of taking countless high-stakes bubble tests from first grade through twelfth? How dare we question the fact that subjects not on these tests (such as art, history, creative writing) are getting squeezed out of the curriculum? How dare we demand that real educators be at the table to form education policy? How dare we suggest that teachers can use their training and experience to create their own assessments of their students' learning?! But most of all, how dare we want our children to read so that they can become creative, independent thinkers and not just "pass the test"?

Seclusion Rooms, Suspension, Corporal Punishment, OH MY!

Or Why I LOVE Functional Behavior Assessments

What is a Functional Behavior Assessment? From The Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice ( http://cecp.air.org/fba/ ):

Afunctional behavioral assessment looks beyond the behavior itself. The focus when conducting a functional behavioral assessment is on identifying significant, pupil-specific social, affective, cognitive, and/or environmental factors associated with the occurrence (and non-occurrence) of specific behaviors. This broader perspective offers a better understanding of the function or purpose behind student behavior. Behavioral intervention plans based on an understanding of "why" a student misbehaves are extremely useful in addressing a wide range of problem behaviors.

I can't tell you how many school meetings I've gone to where negative behavior comes up as a topic someone at the school is chomping at the bit to discuss. And they do discuss it, often times quite rudely,inappropriately, and in great detail.

I've been there. In a classroom with 30 kids. I've gotten frustrated with students before. I can understand why children get suspended, locked in isolation rooms, paddled, and arrested, but I don't have to accept it. Not for any child. Not at any school. Special needs child, out-of-control school, urban school, poor child. Not for any child. And schools should not tolerate it.

When I ask the team at these school meetings if they've done a functional behavior assessment they usually get quite defensive, or worse, don't know what I'm talking about or tell me their district doesn't "do" functional behavior assessments. Even if the district encourages fba's (and I haven't seen this a lot in MS, TN, or AR), teachers are often reluctant to carry one out because it means documentation, observation, and paperwork and, did they mention they've had it up to here with that student?!

But teachers, when removed from stressful working conditions, really do want what's best for the child and for their classes. With proper support and training, teachers can revolutionize discipline procedures in public schools. Every school district should have in-service training on fba's and positive behavioral intervention and support and how to carry them out. Additionally, teachers should be better supported through common planning times, adequate planning time, smaller classes, flexibility to use engaging teaching and learning methods, and support from administrators. With this support teachers have the work environment needed to go beyond the behavior, get to know the student better, and prevent unwanted behavior.

What you need to know about our new Secty of Ed

Originally posted in Daily Kos

The Chicago Tribune and New York Times have reported that President-Elect Barack Obama will announce on Tuesday that CEO of Chicago Public Schools Arne Duncan is his pick for Secretary of Education. Based on the comments and poll results of DKos posts on Duncan here and here, I realize that many dKos readers feel they don't know enough about Arne Duncan to form a strong opinion. Who is Arne Duncan and what has he done in Chicago?

Arne Duncan grew up in the Hyde Park section of Chicago. He went to school at The University of Chicago Laboratory Schools (where Sasha and Malia Obama will attend until they move to D.C.). His father was a psychology professor at U Chicago and his mother runs the Sue Duncan Children's Center, where, according to Wikipedia , Duncan hung out and honed his basketball skills. Duncan graduated from Harvard with a degree in sociology. After four years of playing pro basketball in Australia, Duncan returned to Chicago and became Director of the Ariel Education Initiative(AEI).

After four years of playing pro basketball in Australia, Duncan returned to Chicago and became Director of the Ariel Education Initiative(AEI). AEI is an initiative run by Ariel Investments, whose slogan is "Slow and Steady Wins the Race". According to their "About Ariel" website page,

By concentrating on the long-term, our patient approach allows us to take advantage of buying opportunities that frequently arise from Wall Street’s excessive focus on the short term. We invest in quality companies in industries where we have proven expertise. And we only buy when these quality businesses are selling at an excellent value.

They must be quite busy right now.

Ariel Education Initiative grew from Ariel Investment's goal toward "strengthening the neighborhoods and cities in which we live and work, practicing a hands-on model of corporate responsibility." The jewel in AEI's crown is the Ariel Community Academy, which is
a small Chicago Public School based on a student-family-school-community partnership. The Academy model is rooted in the understanding that family and community are vital ingredients in the social, physical, emotional and educational well being of children.

From the Principal's Message one can see that the school has a progressive, process-oriented approach, in stark contrast to Chicago Public School's focus on test scores. I'd like to name the principal here, but I cannot find her name on the school's website, just her picture. Here is her Philosophy of Education:

Our philosophy is congruent with the Experimentalist philosophy which views change as an ever-present process in a student’s learning experience. Experimentalism insists that curriculum is the subject matter of social experience and instruction is a problem solving, project-oriented process. The role of the teacher is to assist and advise the student, actively participating and contributing to their learning in order to expand and discover the society they live in and share experiences together. We believe that a child’s education at Ariel Community Academy should be based on current and up-to-date research that is supported by the best teaching and learning methods. Therefore, students should be aware of their own multiple intelligences and utilize a wide variety of abilities to demonstrate what they have learned.

Despite AEI's understanding that family and community are key stockholders in children's emotional and educational well being, and despite the educational philosophy of the public school they support, Arne Duncan became sucked into Mayor Richard Daley's vision of public schools and their reform. In 1998 Duncan joined Chicago Public Schools as the Deputy Chief of Staff for CPS's former CEO. By 2001 Mayor Daley had appointed Duncan CEO.


Historically, school board members have been elected to district positions by community members. Increasingly, this democratic power has been usurped by at-large school board positions and mayoral control. When Mayor Daley took control of CPS in 1995 he radically altered the power structure of the schools and school reform, taking power away from community members, parents, teachers, and students. Mayoral control of schools has not proved to bring improvement.


As Joel Rubin, reporter for the L.A. Times writes

But Chicago, the nation’s third-largest school system, can hardly be seen as an advertisement for mayoral control of schools. After a decade with Daley in
charge, the Chicago district has failed to distinguish itself from other major urban school districts. Many of its schools remain subpar and, overall,Chicago’s students continue to score poorly on reading and math exams used to compare big-city districts. "It is hard to argue that we’re worse off than we were a decade ago, but we’re not dramatically better off either," said education consultant Alexander Russo, who has written extensively about school reform in Chicago. "If mayoral control was the best thing since sliced bread, after 10 years you would expect Chicago to have risen to the top. It is far from a magic bullet."

Tuesday Barack Obama will make his announcement with Arne Duncan at Dodge Renaissance Academy. Dodge was the one of the first school to change to a private charter school under CPS's Renaissance 2010 program. From the Chicago Public Schools website,

In June 2004, Mayor Richard Daley launched Renaissance 2010, a bold initiative whose goal is to increase the number of high quality educational options in communities across Chicago by 2010. New schools are created through a competitive, community-based selection process which establishes a set of high standards to which every new school will be held accountable. In 2005, Chicago Public Schools opened the first "cohort" of Renaissance 2010 schools.

The goal of R2010 is to close down "failing" schools, send the kids somewhere else, and reinvent the closed schools as privatized charter schools. The claim that this allows parents the choice to send their kids to successful schools has not been challenged as parents are scared to let their children travel across town through unfamiliar and often violent, unsafe neighborhoods. During Duncan's tenure he has closed many schools, with little to no support for the closed or receiving schools. Gangs from the closed schools get splintered and go into schools with rival gang members, creating an unacceptable level of violence and death of Chicago Public Schools students.


George Schmidt, founder of the newspaper Substance, wrote a commentary on crime and violence in Chicago Public Schools

"More than two years ago, as I've testified to before the City Council Education Committee, the Chicago Teachers Union predicted the increase in violence and gang problems that would result from the closing of high schools (at that time, Austin and Calumet; since, Englewood and Collins). On June 12, 2004, at 10:00 a.m.(Calumet) and 2:00 p.m. (Austin), I testified on behalf of the Chicago Teachers Union, where I was at the time director of school security and safety. We warned that the closing of Austin and Calumet would result in increased violence at the receiving schools. The same warning could have been issued in 2005, when Englewood was closed, and in 2006, when Collins was closed. Instead, the media generally hailed the closings as necessary "toughness" because the schools were slandered as "failing."

"This school year, the problems of violence are worse and earlier than in the past three years. In many cases, they are the direct result of the disruption of the city's poorest communities by school closings under "Renaissance 2010." The additional pressures on west side elementary schools caused by the closings of Frasier and Morse elementary schools is added to the community pressure caused by the closing of Collins High School. On the south side, the pressures caused by the Calumet and Englewood closings continue to hammer schools as far east as Hyde Park and as far west (now) as Bogan.

"Problems are festering or growing at every general high school on the west and south sides right now. And the cause of the increase in those problems, this year and for the last three school years, has been the school closing and "Renaissance" policies of CPS.

But have Arne Duncan and Mayor Daley pulled up Chicago's test scores? Julie Woestehoff of PURE and Monty Neill of FairTest authored the extensive "Chicago School Reform: Lessons for the Nation" study that contrasts the success of Chicago schoools governed by parent-majority local school councils with the lack of sucess of "reform" schools.

Research on the 1990-2005 period of school reform in Chicago clearly demonstrates that teaching to the test has not produced greater learning, and more generally, that the CPS test-centered policies of the Vallas era did not work.

On the positive side, Arne Duncan was an original signer of A Broader, Bolder Approach to Education. As I've blogged about before, I'm a member of BBA.
A Bolder, Broader Approach has also been busy recently, advancing its campaign by sending emails to 860+ signers of its statement. BBA's conviction is that

schools alone cannot close the achievement gap, but that school improvement must be complemented by improvements in the social and economic conditions from which children come to school -- specifically by high-quality early childhood programs, provision of comprehensive routine and preventive health care, and high-quality after school and summer programs.

This, of course, is a direct response to those in organizations (such as Teach for America) who believe that high teacher quality is the only factor necessary to get those test scores up. These groups work against teacher unions and bash many older,established teachers as being uncaring and mediocre.

BBA is now forming an advisory board and committees to help direct each of it's goals: Outreach and Recruitment (e.g., new BBA signers); Health (including school clinics); Early Childhood; School Improvement; After-School and Summer Programs; and Comprehensive and Coordinated Services.

Additionally, BBA will

sponsor a series of forums on Capitol Hill, as well as, where possible, state capitals, on various aspects of the broader bolder approach. At these forums, signers of the BBA will describe more specifically the statement's principles. We plan initially to sponsor sessions on the importance of health care for achievement, on what is known about the impact of early childhood programs, on what is known about the impact of after school and summer programs, and on how accountability policies can be sufficiently comprehensive to ensure that a broader, bolder approach can be carried out.
Our Web site (www.boldapproach.org) will be further expanded, and become, we expect, the definitive resource for state and federal policymakers for research on, and solid evidence for, this broader, bolder approach.
We will sponsor a series of demonstration projects, in half a dozen cities nationwide, where school improvement, early childhood programs, adequate health care, and after school and summer programs will be coordinated to produce real outcome gains for disadvantaged children.

Please check out their website for updates!

So the question becomes, will Arne Duncan (separated from Mayor Daley and Daley's school reform agenda) lean toward the Broader, Bolder Approach and the educational philosophy of the Ariel Community Academy when he heads of the U.S. Department of Education, or will he continue the pro-privitazation/pro-high stakes testing/pro-edubiz agenda of Mayor Daley?