|
January 2010
Miriam is a friend of mine and a veteran school district attorney from Massachusetts. As the owner of Park Place Publications, I was excited and proud to help Miriam publish this book. She has seen the system from the inside — as a school attorney, a speaker/trainer and a special education hearing officer. Her little book is easy to read, but don’t be fooled. Fixing Special Education packs a wallop. It is full of thoughtful ideas and suggestions to remedy what is wrong, while maintaining what is right about our services to students with disabilities. Educational leaders need to read this book. To say that the system that serves these students is “broken” does not mean that everything about it is wrong. On the contrary, as Miriam points out, there is much to celebrate. Students who previously were excluded from school are now in regular attendance. We have learned to raise our expectations — to focus on the students’ abilities, not the disabilities. We have been challenged to use our creativity and resources to overcome prejudices and preconceptions about what kids can and cannot do. All to the good. So, what’s wrong? What’s wrong is exactly what President Gerald Ford predicted would be wrong when he signed the original federal bill into law: (1) the law has promised more than it can deliver, thus falsely raising the expectations of parents; (2) “a vast array of detailed, complex, and costly administrative requirements”; and (3) the use of tax dollars to support administrative paperwork rather than educational programs. Special education has been the leader in so many areas that it is ironic to see it be so behind the times in other areas. It has been a leader in encouraging parent participation, using research to support educational practices and focusing on the uniqueness of each learner. But it is way back in the 20th century with its over-emphasis on procedures and paperwork as proof of progress. The rest of education has moved beyond process to results. But in special education, we still are hassling over who was at the ARD meeting, whether or not the “prior written notice” was properly filled out and whether or not the behavior plan was supported by a proper functional behavioral assessment. Moreover, if we get into a disagreement with the parents of special ed students, we turn it over to an adversarial, legalistic system of dispute resolution that is completely contrary to the purpose and intent of the collaboration the law encourages. If a system is adversarial and legalistic, the lawyers will take it over. And they have. Miriam’s book offers ample evidence that these are real problems. More importantly, she offers solutions. For example, we need a system of dispute resolution. Parent participation is meaningless without it. But we could not have devised a more cumbersome, expensive and inappropriate process than the one we have. What sense does it make to have lawyers serving as hearing officers who make educational decisions about kids? Moreover, our due-process hearing system is only available to parents of students with disabilities. And yet, there are many other kids who are victims of segregation, exclusion and discrimination. Where is the fairness in that? Miriam proposes an “educational ombudsman” as an alternative. It would be simpler, more accessible and faster. And it would mean that educational decisions are made by educators rather than lawyers. Miriam’s book is a conversation starter. Read it. Start the conversation in your district. JIM WALSH is editor in chief of Texas School Business. Also a school attorney, he co-founded the firm of Walsh, Anderson, Brown, Gallegos & Green, P.C. He can be reached at jwalsh@wabsa.com or by visiting www.walshanderson.com. |
We all know the old adage, “If it ain’t broke… .” But attorney Miriam Freedman thinks our special education system is broken and needs fixing. Moreover, she offers up a solution in her neatly packaged book,