Archive for November, 2005

Happy BDay IDEA

Published by JohnL on 29 November 2005 in News. 0 Comments

In an e-mail message, my colleague and friend Joel Mittler of Long Island University (NY, US) reminded me

[Today] is the 30th anniversary of IDEA. Most of us are probably too young to recall life before IDEA (or perhaps too old to remember). With all its flaws and problems, perhaps we should take a moment and in our own way remind out colleagues, students, and others of what it means to have a law that guarantees an education to all children, no matter what their disability. I like to note that we had compulsory education laws in this country in the 1850s but it took another 100+ years to include children with disabilities. While we continue to fight among ourselves as well as with those in power, it’s also not a bad time to thank those that made it all possible. I’ll start with Fred Weintraub and Ed Martin. Thanks, guys. Who else deserves a good hug?

Joel

Paul Sanchez’s ride

Published by JohnL on 27 November 2005 in News. 3 Comments

Paul Sanchez, who had Learning Disabilities as a child, rode 10,000 miles on a bicycle (I presume just one) around the US, passing through 32 states, 13 major cites, and many landmarks to raise awareness of LD. He rode the tour alone. He met with kids along the way. He recorded his tour on video and has made parts of it available on his blog. He plans to make a documentary and donate proceeds to Learning Disability organizations. You can see some of the video already.

Links:

Ditz covers dyspedagogia

Published by JohnL on 26 November 2005 in Comments. 0 Comments

Over on I Speak of Dreams, Liz Ditz has an entry based on a speech by Michael J. Petrilli about the reasons educators continue to use relatively less effective means of teaching reading. Liz’s comment on the excerpt from Mr. Petrilli’s talk echoes one of my favorite themes, dyspedagogia as a cause of reading problems. She wrote,

I wish that every resistant teacher could be made to face the consequences for his or her students of “whole language”. There’s a word for illnesses caused by doctors — iatrogenic. “Whole language” -tainted teaching, especially in K-3 classrooms, is a cause of pedagogenic learning disabilities.

“Pedagogenic learning disabilities” reminds me of dyspedagogia. I first encountered the term dyspedagogia in a chapter by S. Alan Cohen. It’s a delightful spin on our penchant for creating scientific-sounding names for phenomena. Cohen suggests how to address dyspedagogia that would be pretty consistent with Mr. Petrilli’s and Liz’s arguments.

It would be wonderful to have in place the kind and quality of instruction that would substantially reduce—if not eliminate— reading problems caused by dyspedagogia. maleducation, dysteachia, or whatever. Once we can separate the instructional casualties from the students who have unique learning disabilities, then we can start to do serious research about what makes those learners unique.

Link to Liz’s entry and a link to a reference list where one can find the reference to Cohen’s chapter.

Sister Joanne Marie Kliebhan

Published by JohnL on 21 November 2005 in News. 0 Comments

Picture of Sister Joanne Marie KliebhanSister Joanne Marie Kliebhan, a long-time and resourceful advocate for children with disabilities, died 13 November 2005 in Milwaukee (WI, US) at 80 years of age. My colleague Janet Lerner has written these notes of remembrance.

Sister Joanne Marie Kliebhan
1925-2005

Sister Joanne Marie Kliebhan was a very early advocate of Early Childhood Special Education. She told me about fighting the medical community in Milwaukee in trying to establish a facility in Milwaukee to provide intervention services for infants with disabilities. The doctors strongly discouraged her, advising that such infants should be placed in institutions. She believed that these children could thrive and learn in the right learning environment.

Sister Joanne Marie Kliebhan received her Ph.D. at the University of Illinois with Sam Kirk, and she put everything she had learned into establishing a facility at the St. Francis Children’s Center in a remarkable building, that had the latest architectural and education innovations for children with special needs. She served as Educational Director and Eli Tash served as the Financial Director. Once you entered the building, there were two identical offices—one for the Educational Director and one for the Financial Director. One office had a large cross on the back wall, and one office had a Star of David.

Sistern Joanne Marie served as Program Chair for one of LDA’s Annual conferences. Eli Tash served as an Early President of LDA (the Learning Disabilities Association). Eli and I served as co-director of the LDA conference in Kansas City.

Sam Kirk, Sister Joanne Marie, and I were co-authors of the second edition of Sam Kirk’s first book, Teaching Reading to Slow and Disabled Learners, Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1978.

Etched on the building of the St. Francis Children’s Achievement Center are the words that guided Sister Joanne Marie Kliebhan in her life’s work.

—All children can learn if we can learn how to teach them.—

Sister Joanne Marie Kliebhan wrote her own story, My Journal with Francis, which is linked to this note.

Janet Lerner

Readers interested in learning more about Sister Joanne Marie may consult the editorial obituary, “Helping children was her calling,” from the Milwaukee Journal. Also, there is an earlier story published when Sister Joanne Marie and Sister Camille were honored for their contributions to education.

Another S-v-W editorial

Published by JohnL on 21 November 2005 in News. 0 Comments

In “There has to be a a Better Way for Special Education Students,” Jennifer Roback Morse of townhall.com (Washington, DC, US) provides her opinion about the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Schaffer v. Weast.

School districts around the country breathed a sigh of relief last week when the Supreme Court ruled on an arcane dispute involving the federal government’s mandate for special education students. Under federal law, public schools are required to provide a “free, appropriate public education” to all students, regardless of disability. The dispute concerned which party, the school or the family, has the burden of proof in showing whether the plan is appropriate. Schools could see lots of dollars flying out their windows if parents could demand better services. But hidden in this case is a clue to a better solution. Since both sides are dissatisfied with the current system of satisfying the federal requirement to serve disabled students, there is room for a change that makes both parties better off.

Her analysis, based no so much on the technical aspect of the decsion and more on the issue of remedies, leads her to suggest something akin to vouchers. (If you are keeping score, this is the third follow-up on the decision I’ve seen. If readers—all two of you—have seen others, please pass ‘em along via the comments section for this or any of the previous entries.) Link to Ms. Morse’s commentary.

NY Times on S-v-W case

Published by JohnL on 19 November 2005 in News. 0 Comments

Although it will be years before they are clear, the effects of the US Supreme Court’s decision in the Schaffer v. Weast case may be mediated by the state in which cases are brought, according to an analysis by Elissa Gootman of the New York Times. The court held that the burden of proof is on the party bringing the action; in special education disputes between parents and schools, this is usually parents. Based on interviews with experts (inlcuding Pete Wright) and government officials, Ms. Gootman found that parents face more formidable challenges than they previously faced and that differences in state laws, rules, and regulations are likely to affect the processes and outcomes of cases.

Essentially, states fall into three categories on disputes over individualized education plans. One group includes Texas, Virginia and Maryland, where the Supreme Court upheld what has been in practice. The second group includes New Jersey and New York, where the burden of proof shifts to the parents. In the third group, states including Alabama and Connecticut have regulations or statutes that place the burden of proof on school districts.

I find this intriguing and plan to keep an eye on the topic over the next few years. However, I wonder how much it will matter, in fact. Here’s why I wonder: As I understood the issue before the court, the question was what to do when there is essentially a tie. I probably don’t know enough, so I’d welcome correction, but it seems to me that when parents have a clear case, the burden-of-proof issue isn’t going to arise.

Link to Ms. Gootman’s informative article. Links to previous coverage in LD Blog of Schaffer v. Weast is here, here, and here.